|
|
Post by toyotami on Sept 12, 2008 9:34:15 GMT -5
Watching Xade battle the master i see Xade just missed a chance to win the game. yes, a gamble that Exdeath undoubtedly saw and decided not to play against, but a maladroit S to continue the Fod line against against the ExDs W/W would have been game winning.
Seems to me the new school is all about exploiting the game for cheap wins. And i mean that in the best light. There are quick wins to be scrapped out and they are a win no matter how one looks at it.
ExDeath and Tchichi play tight, as tight as always and they win. Neither has lost since coming back (?)...I'd like to see the new school go for some throats and some cheeky para or fod wins, these old boys are playing old boy style and they do it well. I'd also enjoy seeing the old boys school all the new scamps and put them in their boxes with tight by the book arse kickery. Basically its nice to see the tournament in full swing.
Old school: The titch and ExD Vs
New school: Bio and Succat
with special guests Xade and toyotomi, the hybrids
Ahh, Exdeath isn't in the tourney but i hope a few of the guys get to throw balls with him.
EDIT: To Vermont and Awall and other warlocks, sorry i didn't include you in the original post...but i will now..how would you describe yourselves and the style you play with if the above three could be classified as categories?
|
|
|
|
Post by ExDeath on Sept 12, 2008 9:42:22 GMT -5
Edit: Nevermind, you're right.
|
|
|
|
Post by toyotami on Sept 12, 2008 9:45:00 GMT -5
To further muddy the pool of my intoxicated rant i would like to qualify with a quick look at openings...foreseeing an argument that these categories may not exist i put openings forward as an example. You'd be hard pressed, old schoolers, to open with anything short of D/P. My games with Succat and Bio, both mid high 1900 players have often entailed neither of us beginning with D/P. there is a definite difference in style. It may be argued that the new style is, in fact, inferior but with this post, and perhaps many inflammatory posts like it, i would be interested to see which way the dice fall when these two schools meet a few or more times. None of us are getting any younger and, being in different continents as we are, and seeing as it is all a game, why don't we open up some brwaaaaaaaarrrrrlssss!
|
|
|
|
Post by xade on Sept 12, 2008 9:45:41 GMT -5
I was sure that he was gunna run with a para on the right, which would have left me way wider open had I gone with the S's.  Ah well, the man is a master for a reason. Though it will be nice to play him again once I've got a few games of his to look at to judge his calls... sadly that, I think, is where my strengths lie. |
|
|
|
Post by xade on Sept 12, 2008 9:47:05 GMT -5
FSSSD
FSWPP
That would stop a mirror wouldn't it?
|
|
|
|
Post by xade on Sept 12, 2008 9:49:34 GMT -5
To further muddy the pool of my intoxicated rant i would like to qualify with a quick look at openings...foreseeing an argument that these categories may not exist i put openings forward as an example. You'd be hard pressed, old schoolers, to open with anything short of D/P. My games with Succat and Bio, both mid high 1900 players have often entailed neither of us beginning with D/P. there is a definite difference in style. It may be argued that the new style is, in fact, inferior but with this post, and perhaps many inflammatory posts like it, i would be interested to see which way the dice fall when these two schools meet a few or more times. None of us are getting any younger and, being in different continents as we are, and seeing as it is all a game, why don't we open up some brwaaaaaaaarrrrrlssss! I've found myself running with DP more and more of late...  |
|
|
|
Post by ExDeath on Sept 12, 2008 9:59:18 GMT -5
Well, as far as D/P goes, I think the homework has already been done. That's not to say no other opening stands a chance, but even D/P vs D/P you can break the loop without sacrificing too much. If you go for the invis, you're slightly worse but it's an interesting game. If you go for the para, you have a chance to be a little better or a little (more) worse. It's never the end of the world, and you can't play safe against me and expect to win, as you said. So if you're going to make a slight concession by opening something other than D/P, why not at least start with D/P and make the concession a few turns later?
|
|
|
|
Post by BioLogIn on Sept 12, 2008 13:29:58 GMT -5
Wow. I was away for like half a day, and when I'm back, we have a brand new 'old versus new' thread.
==
ExDeath and Tchichi play tight, as tight as always and they win. Neither has lost since coming back (?)
==
Not true. ExDeath played like 8 games and won all, although most were VFs and some were Enrage\Panic ones. But Tchichi has lost 2 of 6 finished games (66855 and 66866)... and pegster lost a few as well... but pegster and Tchichi were open for Friendly\ladder challenges for like 20 games already, and ExDeath did only 1 or 2 non-VF so far.
==
the new school is all about exploiting the game for cheap wins
New school: Bio and Succat
==
I deny this. I never work towards 'short' win, unless
a) I don't really care about this game
b) I'm very tired from this game
In 'normal' state I always work for the win. Regardless of how close or far is it.
==
My games with Succat and Bio, both mid high 1900 players have often entailed neither of us beginning with D/P. there is a definite difference in style.
==
I don't have style of 'not opening with D/P'. But I have a "style" of examining EACH opponent before game start and choosing the most appropriate opening VS his opening. Check my tournament games from round one. Three opponents, three openings, and for all three games I has called opponent's openings and matched them with mine.
==
as far as D/P goes, I think the homework has already been done. That's not to say no other opening stands a chance...
==
I haven't yet seen any proof of F/P or F/S being inferior to D/P. That's why now I work with F/P, D/P and F/S.
==
I would be interested to see which way the dice fall when these two schools meet a few or more times.
==
You can be dead sure BioLogIn, Succat, ExDeath, Tchichi, xade and Toyo and awall will cross each other more then once... given all of then will continue playing warlocks XD However, I don't want to oppose 'new' and 'old' - I see nothing good for community coming from such division. What I'd really like to see is a rivalry between a few (3-4) strong clans\teams, each with strong players\masters on their side, challenging each other, clanmates working on misc. openings\homeworking together before big tourneys, and so on. But I don't see how clan division can be 'old' VS 'new'. That's nonsense, no better they dividing players based on hair color... or height... or age.
|
|
|
|
Post by ExDeath on Sept 12, 2008 13:55:18 GMT -5
I haven't yet seen any proof of F/P or F/S being inferior to D/P. That's why now I work with F/P, D/P and F/S. This topic has been done to death, and I see no reason why people continue to discuss it. F/P, F/S, whatever, lots of openings are reasonable but they get you into serious trouble against other openings. D/P is completely unexploitable. I play it every game. The fact that I can tell you what I'm going to play in advance without you being able to use that information to your advantage is proof that it is, simply, "the best" opening. If we play a game and you promise to start with F/P, you will get crushed, because I won't open D/P against you. It's exploitable. S/W is the perfect example of a good opening that happens to be exploitable. It's actually better than D/P against most openings, but what does it lose to? D/P. I know some people think that the opening is fairly irrelevant, and while it is true that many games go back and forth, a game played *perfectly* will always come down to whoever has the initiative in the opening. It is very, very hard to come back against a top player if you are outplayed on move 5, and since no opening has the ability to do this the majority of the time against D/P, I will continue to play it. |
|
|
|
Post by BioLogIn on Sept 12, 2008 14:15:23 GMT -5
ExDeath
I _know_ that F/P and F/S are exploitable. However, they perform _at least_ on par VS D/P. Or - as I think right now - they are _slightly_ better then D/P when handled properly. Now what is more important - to have a slight edge VS opening that is used like 80% of time, or to suck VS opening that is used like less then 5% of time? If there is a style question in warlocks at all, this one is certainly is - how much risk should one take? The current risk/reward of F/P opening are fine with me, so I use F/P. Risk/reward of S/W opening (to suck VS D/P = to suck VS 80% of used openings) is not fine with me, and I'm not using it.
You may say that one should take no risk, and that one should always chose the optimal move\best opening, but then, wasn't that you who said a few posts ago that one cannot win VS you without a risk? ) Isn't there a contradiction? ))
|
|
|
|
Post by ExDeath on Sept 12, 2008 14:29:36 GMT -5
ExDeath I _know_ that F/P and F/S are exploitable. However, they perform _at least_ on par VS D/P. Or - as I think right now - they are _slightly_ better then D/P when handled properly. Now what is more important - to have a slight edge VS opening that is used like 80% of time, or to suck VS opening that is used like less then 5% of time? If there is a style question in warlocks at all, this one is certainly is - how much risk should one take? The current risk/reward of F/P opening are fine with me, so I use F/P. Risk/reward of S/W opening (to suck VS D/P = to suck VS 80% of used openings) is not fine with me, and I'm not using it. You may say that one should take no risk, and that one should always chose the optimal move\best opening, but then, wasn't that you who said a few posts ago that one cannot win VS you without a risk? ) Isn't there a contradiction? )) Yes, but you and I completely disagree that F/P and F/S perform better than average against D/P. There are some lines which allow you to get a big advantage early on, which might be a worthwhile strategy against a stronger player, I'm not arguing that. But if you miss, you're busted. My analysis of F/S is pretty limited but I KNOW for a fact having played with and against F/P countless times that it does not stand up to D/P, at all, over the long run. It is probably a 60/40 matchup for D/P with equal skill, because you either obtain a medium advantage or you fall into hopelessness. |
|
|
|
Post by ExDeath on Sept 12, 2008 14:38:08 GMT -5
I should add to my above post that, naturally, warlock skill matters a lot and can overcome many opening deficiencies. I'm sure you can have good success with offbeat openings, because you're stronger than most (if not all) other players. I can play that junk too. But really, analyze your advantage after move 7 or so in F/P vs a strong D/P player like me, Tchichi, xade..whoever else plays D/P. You will find that the decision tree favors D/P every time. You can overcome this with good psychology and good lines later, but you will always be coming from behind.
|
|
|
|
Post by BioLogIn on Sept 12, 2008 14:41:04 GMT -5
Yes, but you and I completely disagree that F/P and F/S perform better than average against D/P. There are some lines which allow you to get a big advantage early on, which might be a worthwhile strategy against a stronger player, I'm not arguing that. But if you miss, you're busted. My analysis of F/S is pretty limited but I KNOW for a fact having played with and against F/P countless times that it does not stand up to D/P, at all, over the long run. It is probably a 60/40 matchup for D/P with equal skill, because you either obtain a medium advantage or you fall into hopelessness. Well, since none of us has done a complete analysis of F/P vs D/P (or F/S vs D/P) we have to rely on our experience. Your experience tells you D/P has an edge. My experience tells me otherwise. Should one day I'll come to understanding F/P doesn't offer advantage over D/P in majority of situation, I'll stop using it. I'm still learning this game, after all. |
|
|
|
Post by BioLogIn on Sept 12, 2008 14:46:27 GMT -5
Then I'll add as well )
I'm very looking forward towards playing VS you and tchichi. Just as soon as tourney ends for me. If that will lead to my re-evaluation of F/P - I'll improve my game, that's great. If that will lead to your re-evaluation of F/P - the better XD
As for xade, he can confirm that after a significant number of our games (back when we were low-1800) he was forced to agree that (my) F/P has an edge over (his) D/P... and that was the very moment he started to use F/P for himself ) I dunno why you still count him among D/P-players ))
|
|
|
|
Post by ExDeath on Sept 12, 2008 14:54:18 GMT -5
Well, since none of us has done a complete analysis of F/P vs D/P (or F/S vs D/P) we have to rely on our experience. Your experience tells you D/P has an edge. My experience tells me otherwise. Why are you assuming I haven't? Dude, I spent almost a full year just trying to figure out the best point to end the D/P loop, you really think I haven't played out 1,000 imaginary games on a whiteboard with D/P vs F/P? This is an opinion that Taliesin, Tchichi and I have all arrived at independently a long time ago (no forums back in those days after all), when openings like F/P, F/S, S/S, even F/W were commonplace. It was reinforced by nawglan's archive giving D/P the highest winning percentage in serious games (aside from S/W, which was subsequently busted). It endured, and after Slartucker+Taliesin started analyzing the openings on paper, after I analyzed them on my whiteboard, we all came to the same conclusion. F/P does not stand up to D/P with perfect play from both sides. I'm sorry to rant, but this is just SUCH an old topic and you have not been around very long. I really hate how it is continually dredged up. Every once in awhile somebody comes along who thinks their opening is great against D/P and it just gets shot down. You're not the first to recommend F/P, I mean really, F/P was a popular opening before D/P was! F/S is new and interesting, I'll give you that, but nobody's reinventing the wheel here. It's all been tried before. I'm just telling you what 8 years of history and data and real games have proven. |
|
