Hax has a really ineffective playstyle

[zuloon]

So I was watching an interview with Hax:

Some quotes:
"I showed that I had the potential. It's just a matter of consistency."
"My peak skill is soooo high."
"20xx is a serious ideology. I'm going for the perfect option."
"I study fox frame data like a madman."
"To catch a buffered roll, you need to jump on frame 7 out of shine, and then you need to shine on frame 10"

Hax spends way too much time trying to pefect "tech" skill so that his actual play suffers. I think that the reason that Hax performs so much worse in tournaments than in friendlies is because he tries way too hard to do the "perfect" option. In friendlies, you aren't going to be playing many sets in a row so there won't be any fatigue setting in. In tournaments, however, it is unreasonable to assume that you will do the perfect option consistently every time. Hax's playstyle is high risk, low reward.

 

[Wind]

In theory, it makes sense, but it's just not practical at all.

I play tennis as well, and I want to compare this to a tennis player saying that "perfect tech skill" could be something like an unreturnable shot as every shot you take. The best tennis players don't do this, simply because it's not feasible. At some point, you have to recognize that some things are not humanly possible and 20XX is one of those things.

 

[Spazzy]

Hax's playstyle is high risk, low reward.

And this is why he should go back to his Falcon

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Nah its definitely possible. The only way to get to the top level is through lots of studying of the game and thinking about strategies. If you really think the path to improvement is by switching to a worse character and thinking about the game less, you have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[SAUS]

He gets higher placings at tournaments than the other hundreds of entrants. He has to have something good about his play style (or at least better than the hundreds of other entrants). I think he plays fine.

However, I think he has a bad mentality or at least the way it is expressed when he talks about it makes it seem bad. It feels like he wants to basically play TAS without the 1-frame reaction time (because that is actually impossible for humans). You have to adapt to your opponent no matter who it is, but he never talks about that.

I think it is the consequence of this thing where you begin to understand the game in a different way, so you start to say that that is how the game works to people while ignoring all the stuff that you just know. When I say "know" here, I mean you are so accustomed to it that it is second nature. Essentially, Hax knows how to play melee, and to further his ability in the game, he looks into greater option coverage - even if it is from ridiculously hard tech skill. When other people hear what he is talking about, all they hear is "20XX spam tech skill gg", but Hax would not be placing top 8 at TBH4 or almost beating Armada if that's all he did when playing.

 

[Wind]

Of course he isn't just spamming tech skill. He has amazing option coverage and in my opinion is a very good fox to study if you want to learn what the standard options are. I think the only thing really limiting him from the top is that he somewhat forgoes creativity.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

I think it is the consequence of this thing where you begin to understand the game in a different way, so you start to say that that is how the game works to people while ignoring all the stuff that you just know. When I say "know" here, I mean you are so accustomed to it that it is second nature. Essentially, Hax knows how to play melee, and to further his ability in the game, he looks into greater option coverage - even if it is from ridiculously hard tech skill. When other people hear what he is talking about, all they hear is "20XX spam tech skill gg", but Hax would not be placing top 8 at TBH4 or almost beating Armada if that's all he did when playing.

Exactly. Its just ridiculous when people who understand less than 1% of the game the top players do tries to criticize them for being so good, or act like they know better than them. You think doing wacky strats is going to make him do better against the most experienced, technical, patient, and talented players? Get the **** out of here.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

Exactly. Its just ridiculous when people who understand less than 1% of the game the top players do tries to criticize them for being so good, or act like they know better than them. You think doing wacky strats is going to make him do better against the most experienced, technical, patient, and talented players? Get the **** out of here.

I think @ zuloon is doing something right. To me its worse for a person to simply take what others say at face value without challenging what they are saying. At the very least seek out more information on why something is "right or wrong".

Zuloon here has attempted to analyze the game in some fashion. Is the conclusion right or wrong? I am not sure. That is not what I am going to try arguing. The point is that someone is not seeing what Hax has said and be like, "This top player said this bit of information, so therefore it must be true". No, instead Zuloon attempted to criticize that.

Suppose some tells me to get better by practicing L-canceling, wave dashing, and dash dancing. Well, the problem is that there is a ton of stuff about this I do not know. How am I am suppose to practice? Why do I want to practice those things? What is the downsides or benefits to practicing this compared to teching?

As you said, I think its wrong for someone to act like they know better. However, that only occurs when it has been proven that someone is wrong. Otherwise, a person makes a statement finds out they are wrong, then can reevaluate to some other opinion. With the intent being an opinion which gets you closer to being a better player overall.

So I was watching an interview with Hax:
Some quotes:
"I showed that I had the potential. It's just a matter of consistency."
"My peak skill is soooo high."
"20xx is a serious ideology. I'm going for the perfect option."
"I study fox frame data like a madman."
"To catch a buffered roll, you need to jump on frame 7 out of shine, and then you need to shine on frame 10"

Hax spends way too much time trying to pefect "tech" skill so that his actual play suffers. I think that the reason that Hax performs so much worse in tournaments than in friendlies is because he tries way too hard to do the "perfect" option. In friendlies, you aren't going to be playing many sets in a row so there won't be any fatigue setting in. In tournaments, however, it is unreasonable to assume that you will do the perfect option consistently every time. Hax's playstyle is high risk, low reward.

But, to the actual topic.

I am not certain if attempting to be perfect in game-play is feasible or not. When I first started out I literally thought that covering all tech chase options by simply reacting was impossible. Low and behold I started doing that myself what I thought was impossible. Additionally, I thought it was impossible for someone to use dropping from platform while in shield consistently. Again, I was proven wrong by Frootloop by doing this to my marth when I attempt to Utilt a missed tech. I was too slow and hit shield. Instantly, I get countered for hitting shield. Not rarely, but fairly consistently.

What may of have been thought of has impossible back in 05' is becoming the standard from my few years of playing Melee. My opinion about the perfect play is optimistic, but I see it taking a long time. However, I would agree no one has done it (although its pretty close when it comes to punishes). But, by saying "no" and not trying we will never know if perfect play is achievable.

Hax is trying some ideology. Let's see if it works.

Now, some minor comment:
-From my experience here in Madison and tournaments within the area and neighboring state, I actually get to play more matches consecutively at a smashfest, then I do at a tournament. I recall sitting down at say 6pm and going until 10pm before getting off my butt. That whole time playing matches without more than say a half a minute delay. When tournaments came around I would have breaks of time between my next set that would last minutes at a time.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

Seeking out information =/= Saying one of the best players in the history of the game "has an ineffective playstyle"

As a new player, you should be trying to copy everything he does, not pretending like you know better than him

 

[Pistallion]

Improving at this game at the level of a player like Hax us insanely hard and studying frame data can't hurt. I doubt frame data is all he studies, just a part of it. Saying his play style is high risk low reward is grounded in what proof?

"I showed that I had the potential. It's just a matter of consistency."

How is this a bad quote? This is basically the whole game right here, especially at top level

 

[victra♥]

Hax's mindset is really similar to M2K's mindset where everything needs to be frame perfect and every option needs to be the best one.

But this mindset and playstyle loses to wild and creative players like Mango.

 

[Pistallion]

The term "creative" is too loaded when used in games. For example, the term is used in chess a lot, a game that is pure logical. So when a player makes a very "creative" play, isn't it really just extremely logical and furthermore, the optimal move. So isn't, in a sense, a creative player really just the same as someone e like hax, who just tries to do the most optimal choice at all times?

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

Hax's mindset is really similar to M2K's mindset where everything needs to be frame perfect and every option needs to be the best one.

But this mindset and playstyle loses to wild and creative players like Mango.

Assume that to be the case of "wild and creative" > Optimal play. I would say optimal play loses merely because the pilot has short comings. Such as not adhering to optimal play in ever situation or being physically bound by human limitation such as not getting TAS level BS.

Although, I am starting to think that there is a balance (as usually seems to be the case) between attempting to play optimally within the limitations that the gave gives you, yet playing not optimally against human aspects.

If I am Marth and I Fthrow you onto the ground. Optimally, I should be able to cover all options, but on a mistake I can still recover by attempting to play on the human side of things. Such as a person shielding/rolling/dodging after getting up from the tech. In which case, I wait and get a grab because this person did that sort of thing. Its completely sub-optimal to pick this choice. But, with the human aspect it works.

Within your punish game I feel you should be able to be very optimal (depending upon the character), then add in the ability for the player to improvise to make up the short comings of being human. When it comes to neutral game play I am not sure there is ever an optimal way to play (except some match-ups).

 

[-ACE-]

My suggestion for the kid who started this thread.....

FULL BLOWN BAN.

 

[1MachGO]

The term "creative" is too loaded when used in games. For example, the term is used in chess a lot, a game that is pure logical. So when a player makes a very "creative" play, isn't it really just extremely logical and furthermore, the optimal move. So isn't, in a sense, a creative player really just the same as someone e like hax, who just tries to do the most optimal choice at all times?

IMO, in the context of Melee:

Creative = innovative, adaptive, mental (Mango)

Optimal = advantageous, consistent, mechanical (M2K, Hax)

Creative players feel the game, optimal players "play" it, so to speak.

 

[pizzapie7]

Seeking out information =/= Saying one of the best players in the history of the game "has an ineffective playstyle"

As a new player, you should be trying to copy everything he does, not pretending like you know better than him

He was just stating his opinion breh. Besides, isn't this exactly what any analyst does? If someone with clout said the same thing what would the difference be, other than it'd be a name you recognize?

As a new player you should be learning the game in your own way. If that includes questioning the status quo, so be it.

 

[Xyzz]

As a new player, you should be trying to copy everything he does, not pretending like you know better than him

I'd rather try to copy Lucky/Fiction/Cactuar though.

but ya. (:

 

[Champ Gold]

I got question, what in the hell happen in Big House 4?


Hax was fairly doing well against Mango and Armada just keep torching him up and down with Falcon and then Marth. That and he was really salty afterwards on Twitter

 

[Acryte]

So this tourney is a bad example of Hax's playstyle being wrong. He played amazing and his playstyle wasn't the thing getting him killed. For the most part it was player vs player, character vs character; not Fox vs the person controlling him.

 

[MookieRah]

But this mindset and playstyle loses to wild and creative players like Mango.

No, M2K loses to Mango, but you can't say the entire play style loses just because Mango just so happens to be better than pretty much everyone at this game. There are plenty of people that air on the side of Mango's play style that get absolutely slaughtered by M2K.

But basically this thread was started by someone that is dogging a top player for trying to push the envelope on what people think is possible to do in smash. I think it's absurd to criticise him, or even make guesses as to him "losing" due to being too caught up in frame data to play properly. If you can't read his mind, then this is pure speculation of the worst kind.

One thing is for certain here though, people need to work more on their execution as a whole. Hax is doing this hyper mode, so I honestly can't fault him for that. I hope he manages to harness the techniques he's exploring, if only to make people with the kind of mindset in this thread to think twice before criticising something they don't really understand.

 

[soma ghost]

Ineffective is obviously the wrong word. But I do think Hax's 20XX theory is ridiculous. There is no way to cover every option in melee. Even in situations where you are obviously at an advantage, there is almost always a certain amount of reading your opponent (or guessing) required to capitalize. Its not possible to react in every situation and get a substantial, or non counter-able hit.

Someone playing melee 20XX will never have the same potential as someone playing with a more (for lack of a real term) mango style of play imo. A game based around conditioning, baits, and reading your opponent will always be better than trying to do the impossibility of covering every option lol.

Hax is obviously a great player, but this stupid 20XX ideology is holding him back.

 

[MookieRah]

There is no way to cover every option in melee.

Actually, you can, but it depends on your concept of coverage. I'll give you an example:

In the Sheik vs M2 matchup, M2 can cover everything Sheik does from the downthrow on reaction. After the down throw, simply walk towards Shiek (if she DI's away, otherwise you get a free dtilt > grab pretty much). If she techs in place, you are in position to take advantage of the tech, the same goes if it's a missed tech. If she rolls through you, you can easily tech chase to regrab by wavedashing back and turning around. If she rolls away from you, she gives up A LOT of space, which is also a victory as you now have gained a better position.

A lot of people wouldn't consider that Sheik teching away is a win, but in reality it is, as she now has less stage to leverage against you, and is in a position in which she is now forced to react in some way. In these situations, it's more likely that M2 will be able to win in an exchange due to being in an advantaged position than he would be in neutral.

On the issue of 20XX, I don't think that will happen at all, but if it does it won't be something that happens soon. There are lots of things that you can't do, but we don't exactly know where the line is, so bashing a dude for trying to find that line is kinda silly regardless of your feelings on 20XX.

 

[zuloon]

Ineffective is obviously the wrong word. But I do think Hax's 20XX theory is ridiculous. There is no way to cover every option in melee. Even in situations where you are obviously at an advantage, there is almost always a certain amount of reading your opponent (or guessing) required to capitalize. Its not possible to react in every situation and get a substantial, or non counter-able hit.

Someone playing melee 20XX will never have the same potential as someone playing with a more (for lack of a real term) mango style of play imo. A game based around conditioning, baits, and reading your opponent will always be better than trying to do the impossibility of covering every option lol.

Hax is obviously a great player, but this stupid 20XX ideology is holding him back.

Thank you for posting. I think this is what I meant to say.

I agree that ineffective was not the right choice of word, and I also agree that the extent to which he dogmatically clings onto his 20XX ideology is outlandish and foolhardy. Moderation in everything is what I believe.

 

[Bones0]

Hax's mindset is really similar to M2K's mindset where everything needs to be frame perfect and every option needs to be the best one.

But this mindset and playstyle loses to wild and creative players like Mango.

Obviously M2K is very interested in "perfect GG" strats, but I've talked to him before and he very often emphasizes that everything is a mixup and there are counters to everything. It seems like Hax is focused on finding a style of play that can't be countered, so he ends up playing super solid, but very predictable because he only wants to use options that can't be countered. I believe that's why he barely wins every set. Whether it's vs. an up-and-comer like Slox or full-blown veteran, he is basically relying on situational advantages to compensate for strategic disadvantages. The problem with this strat seems apparent when he plays someone like Mango who just gets a feel for his flowcharts and hard reads with super solid punishes.

What a lot of people don't seem to realize is Hax played the same way back when he mained Falcon. The only difference is Falcon is much more conducive to this style of play because he can punish way harder than Fox and can also tank more hits the opponent may get off of reads.

 

[-ACE-]

Falcon can punish harder than fox? Fair enough (in some situations), but who punishes more often? Who has more opportunities to punish? Fox's overall punish game is incredible due to the amount of openings he receives.

Hax is incredible and a lot of you guys are trippin hard. Hax is what, #7-9 in the world? Excuse me while I LMFAO. If you don't like his approach to melee, don't copy it. Let's be honest he's too hard for anyone posting here to copy anyway.

Mango/darkrain/kage dissect the player, Hax/m2k dissect the game (broad generalization), the styles are different but you can't criticize results.

 

[zuloon]

Mango/darkrain/kage dissect the player, Hax/m2k dissect the game (broad generalization), the styles are different but you can't criticize results.

Actually, I can and I will.

It's true that Hax #7 in the world, and that he's a very good smash player. But if you watched the Big House 4 tournament, you would have seen that he is still many levels below Mang0. The vast disparity in skill levels begs the question... why? Why is Hax so much worse than Mang0, or even Mew2King?

That is the discussion that this thread is intended to foster.

You said that Mew2King has a similar playstyle/ideology to Hax. So why is Hax considerably worse than Mew2King?

 

[Flippy Flippersen]

Actually, I can and I will.

It's true that Hax #7 in the world, and that he's a very good smash player. But if you watched the Big House 4 tournament, you would have seen that he is still many levels below Mang0. The vast disparity in skill levels begs the question... why? Why is Hax so much worse than Mang0, or even Mew2King?

That is the discussion that this thread is intended to foster.

You said that Mew2King has a similar playstyle/ideology to Hax. So why is Hax considerably worse than Mew2King?

M2k uses whatever he thinks you're worst of against with characters that have more reliable 0 to deaths being his most used picks (marth/sheik have a stronger combogame than fox at least the way everything is now) for playing perfect all the time combos are more important since it is far more realistic to cover all options. Neutral has more reward for a creative mind to counter your perfect play than thinking about what di is most unexpected in a guaranteed setup.

 

[-ACE-]

Actually, I can and I will.

It's true that Hax #7 in the world, and that he's a very good smash player. But if you watched the Big House 4 tournament, you would have seen that he is still many levels below Mang0. The vast disparity in skill levels begs the question... why? Why is Hax so much worse than Mang0, or even Mew2King?

That is the discussion that this thread is intended to foster.

You said that Mew2King has a similar playstyle/ideology to Hax. So why is Hax considerably worse than Mew2King?

Lol. Mango knows how to beat that type of player and makes it look a LOT easier than it really is. There are so many things going on in a match of that level that go right over most people's heads (such as yours) it's hilarious. You just arent familiar enough with this game to notice intricacies.

M2K considerably better than hax? Well they used to almost go even sheik vs falcon lol. He's M2K man, and he knows how to fight fox (he really only has trouble with mango).

You must think mango is 100x better than leffen because he knows how to get in his head and take advantage of nervousness (he's good at sensing this) and can occasionally get that 4 stock. Lol.

 

[zuloon]

M2k uses whatever he thinks you're worst of against with characters that have more reliable 0 to deaths being his most used picks (marth/sheik have a stronger combogame than fox at least the way everything is now) for playing perfect all the time combos are more important since it is far more realistic to cover all options. Neutral has more reward for a creative mind to counter your perfect play than thinking about what di is most unexpected in a guaranteed setup.

This makes sense to me. Good analysis, Flippy!

Lol. Mango knows how to beat that type of player and makes it look a LOT easier than it really is. There are so many things going on in a match of that level that go right over most people's heads (such as yours) it's hilarious. You just arent familiar enough with this game to notice intricacies.

Awesome ad hominems there.

I think it would be more helpful to everyone if you could point out what these "intricacies" were rather than smugly putting everyone down. People like you kill all thoughtful discussion.

M2K considerably better than hax? Well they used to almost go even sheik vs falcon lol. He's M2K man, and he knows how to fight fox (he really only has trouble with mango).

What kind of analysis is this? "M2K is considerably better than Hax because he's M2K man."

You must think mango is 100x better than leffen because he knows how to get in his head and take advantage of nervousness (he's good at sensing this) and can occasionally get that 4 stock. Lol.

Great strawman. Wonderfully crafted argumentation right there.

 

[-ACE-]

People who are itching to cherry-pick quotes and point out logical fallacies and provide no further insight (regarding melee) make me lol. My point was clear, you have no rebuttal (and probably now realize how flawed your original point was, but are too stubborn to go back on it), so you point out logical fallacies to save face/get the last word in, Q.E.D. lmao.

 

[BTmoney]

I think this to myself sometimes. Hax plays like a realllllly good version of what I used to try to do.
I know that infinite power fox feel that he has. He did the stuff I only thought about doing and the stuff I practiced relatively consistently in high pressure tournament situations.

I really commend him for being as good as he is, it's kind of ridiculous really.

I just wish he would tone down his game slightly and focus more on the PVP aspect and working MUs more than trying to play perfectly. What I'm getting at is we all saw how good Hax was when he was a Falcon main, his play was so fluid and organic. You could see him mind game people (because Falcon has to a lot of the time more so than Fox) a lot more. We all know he obviously understands this stuff and is better at it than 99.9% of players but I just think it's weird how for as good as he was, and how good as he currently is he is kind of underwhelming vs. Marth and vs. Falco. There are other Foxes who are much better at the MUs that have way less tech skill and a little less skill overall. My only qualm with him is that I wish he would re-channel some of that stuff, the abstract part that has nothing to do with tech skill. He obviously knows it, he's not stupid like people try to say. If he toned down his game 5% or got his game to a point where he could consistently be way more technical than everyone else comfortably then man that'd be so scary.

I'm fine with him trying to play perfect (he just decided to become the most technical fox main the world lol, think about how amazing that is). I just hope he doesn't get too caught up in it and forget about some of the other aspects of the game. He seems a little guilty of that TBH when you compare him to the few players above his skill level, the super-top players. Almost like the issue that M2K kind of has vs. other top players although he's obviously better vs them.

That being said I seriously think he can be the best or at least in that god tier if he keeps improving. I think he'll get a big upset in the next year. I think that's a fair stance and I understand the point of view that some players are "above" our criticism (I don't agree with it) but that doesn't mean that they are above having flaws they can fix. You just assume their skill and say what you have to say. Someone could join the forum today and say something that's actually correct.

 

[X WaNtEd X]

Actually, I can and I will.

It's true that Hax #7 in the world, and that he's a very good smash player. But if you watched the Big House 4 tournament, you would have seen that he is still many levels below Mang0. The vast disparity in skill levels begs the question... why? Why is Hax so much worse than Mang0, or even Mew2King?

That is the discussion that this thread is intended to foster.

You said that Mew2King has a similar playstyle/ideology to Hax. So why is Hax considerably worse than Mew2King?

if you had watched melee for longer than six months you would understand how untrue this is. mango knows how to beat hax with "joke characters", but you're still greatly exaggerating the skill difference between them.

also i don't understand how you can act like hax is "considerably worse" than m2k when he has a history of going toe-to-toe with m2k. please go back and watch sets from 2012-2013. you couldn't possibly think this if you hadn't watched more videos. regardless, hax and m2k DO in fact have a similar ideology when it comes to melee. the main difference is characters and the fact that m2k is better at it. ffs m2k and hax trained together!

don't understand how their ideologies are similar? m2k plays for the optimal punish, the optimal move in neutral, the optimal everything. that's a really simplified description of m2k's playstyle that doesn't really do him justice, but you get the point. hax is the same way except with fox and a bigger emphasis on the neutral game rather than punishes. one big similarity m2k and hax also share is their ledge game. both players are arguably the two best from the ledge in the game. hax literally got the invincible rld named after him. and if you haven't already come to the conclusion the m2k is godly from the ledge than i have no further words for you.

 

[BTmoney]

if you had watched melee for longer than six months you would understand how untrue this is. mango knows how to beat hax with "joke characters", but you're still greatly exaggerating the skill difference between them. also i don't understand how you can act like hax is "considerably worse" than m2k when he has a history of going toe-to-toe with m2k.

what does that even mean lol. I love hax but mannnn that just takes no sense

>definitively the best player in the world, has been for years (throw in some armada)
>definitively better than m2k
>definitively better than hbox
>probably better than armada
>wins the head to head
>went falcon
>beats people hax hasn't beat/can't beat/recently lost to

+ hax is 1 maybe 2 wins/years of losses vs m2k
+ no major tournament wins

= no skill gap

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

There really isn't much of a skill gap. Hax loses to like 3 more people (in the entire world). Not that big of a gap.

 

[-ACE-]

Sunny that quote "joke characters" came from a tweet by Hax, seemingly because he really wanted to play vs mango's main (well it would have been falco).

 

[X WaNtEd X]

what does that even mean lol. I love hax but mannnn that just takes no sense

>definitively the best player in the world, has been for years (throw in some armada)
>definitively better than m2k
>definitively better than hbox
>probably better than armada
>wins the head to head
>went falcon
>beats people hax hasn't beat/can't beat/recently lost to

+ hax is 1 maybe 2 wins/years of losses vs m2k
+ no major tournament wins

= no skill gap

what ace said.

also if you're trying to imply that i'm arguing that there is no skill gap between mango and hax then you should go back and re-read my post and take a reading comprehension course. we don't speak meme arrows here buddy.

when i say m2k and hax "go toe-to-toe" i'm not strictly talking about wins/losses; i'm talking about how close the actual games are. i feel like too many people on smashboards don't actually watch sets, they simply skip ahead to the end and go "oh look, that player won. he's much better" or solely read statistics on miom and use that as the basis for their arguments.

 

[bolt.]

Obviously M2K is very interested in "perfect GG" strats, but I've talked to him before and he very often emphasizes that everything is a mixup and there are counters to everything. It seems like Hax is focused on finding a style of play that can't be countered, so he ends up playing super solid, but very predictable because he only wants to use options that can't be countered. I believe that's why he barely wins every set. Whether it's vs. an up-and-comer like Slox or full-blown veteran, he is basically relying on situational advantages to compensate for strategic disadvantages. The problem with this strat seems apparent when he plays someone like Mango who just gets a feel for his flowcharts and hard reads with super solid punishes.

What a lot of people don't seem to realize is Hax played the same way back when he mained Falcon. The only difference is Falcon is much more conducive to this style of play because he can punish way harder than Fox and can also tank more hits the opponent may get off of reads.

I think you're sleeping on slox you **** boy.

 

[zuloon]

There really isn't much of a skill gap. Hax loses to like 3 more people (in the entire world). Not that big of a gap.

Just because he loses to "only" 3 more people doesn't mean there isn't a vast disparity of skill levels. Your rank is a construct that attempts to quantify how good you are relative to other people. But if we put too much stock in it, such a comparison can fail us.

For example, Lebron James is the best basketball player in the world. Kevin Durant is just a little worse at #2. It's debatable who #3 would be, but there is no doubt that these two players stand head and shoulders above the rest of the world's basketball players.

what ace said.

also if you're trying to imply that i'm arguing that there is no skill gap between mango and hax then you should go back and re-read my post and take a reading comprehension course. we don't speak meme arrows here buddy.

when i say m2k and hax "go toe-to-toe" i'm not strictly talking about wins/losses; i'm talking about how close the actual games are. i feel like too many people on smashboards don't actually watch sets, they simply skip ahead to the end and go "oh look, that player won. he's much better" or solely read statistics on miom and use that as the basis for their arguments.

>says that other people should take a reading comprehension course
>fails at reading comprehension himself

>the argument is that there is a clear skill gap
>you claimed that there was not a clear skill gap
>Sunny made it clear that there is a clear skill gap
>now you are backpedaling

if you had watched melee for longer than six months you would understand how untrue this is.

>Strong ad hominem.
>Two can play this game.
>My join date: 2006
>Your join date: 2009

 

[The Soap]

The "Mango is a straight up jerk" tweet was a reference to a particularly popular copypasta in the Twitch chat during TBH4 (and it's hilarious how people reacted).

 

[-ACE-]

Lol zuloon. Maybe one day you'll have a clue.