It's only six months late....

[crzy242]

so was s0nic for a LONG time, but no-one questioned his 20 rank status

p.s. maybe I should make one of these someday

yeah because nobody dared to touch the 4 wider on TF

[Someone2knoe]

How can you say it's not lenient when there are like 500 grand masters
lol. I would rather it be a bell curve with most people as rank 10, the good players 12-14, 15-17 pretty good, and the very pro people 18-20.

Using that system the rank 20's now would be anywhere from to 13-20. Because right now you can play someone rank 20 and they can be either semi decent or very pro.

I remember in blockles if you were rated 1700 then someone 1800 would most likely own you and someone rated over 2000 was rare. The ratings actually accounted for skill unless you cheated.

[DannyBars]

yay

[coolmaninsano]

Sprint times do not translate to multiplayer ability or non ability...

[Someone2knoe]

Sprint times do not translate to multiplayer ability or non ability...

I would never call someone who hasn't broken 60 seconds yet a Grand Master.

You should expect someone who is very good to have a more than decent 40L if they try.

[coolmaninsano]

I would never call someone who hasn't broken 60 seconds yet a Grand Master.

You should expect someone who is very good to have a more than decent 40L if they try.

I have broken 60, just not on TF. 53.73 on Nullpo.

[crzy242]

but the Grand Master ranking is associated with TF, not nullpo, so nullpo scores don't matter

[ManOfMiracles]

And 53 sec isn't even remotely impressive anyways. lol

[lovesky]

^ There's no need to belittle him.

I would never call someone who hasn't broken 60 seconds yet a Grand Master.

You should expect someone who is very good to have a more than decent 40L if they try.

So anyone who is around 60 seconds and more, aren't worth of having the title? Just because they aren't hitting 100+ TPM?

Even if you had an excellent sprint time, there other things to consider such as gameplay.
Someone might not be extremely fast, but have extremely good gameplay, and are able to downstack well, it doesn't mean that they can't be a very good player just because they have a sprint time of over 60 seconds.

There's more to being a "Grand Master" than just being fast and having a sub 60 record. =/

Though I do agree that the rankings on TF are messed up, since people can easily achieve a rank 20 simply by getting Armor and/or Speed Up.

[coolmaninsano]

New 40L: 52.86 on Nullpo.

[Someone2knoe]

There's more to being a "Grand Master" than just being fast and having a sub 60 record. =/

Where did I say being a Grand Master only means you have a sub 60 record.

Even if you had an excellent sprint time, there other things to consider such as gameplay.
Someone might not be extremely fast, but have extremely good gameplay, and are able to downstack well

Where did I say that an excellent sprint time is the only thing to consider? You are just iterating obvious information.

it doesn't mean that they can't be a very good player just because they have a sprint time of over 60 seconds.

Speed is a part of skill believe it or not. A good player must have speed to back up his other skills.

I could go 10 tpm and make the best decisions possible, but someone with decent enough decisions going at 20 will beat me. Why? He's faster.

Obviously there are other factors, someone going at 140 could beat someone going at 160 depending on skills besides speed. But below 100 tpm is the beginning stage for most people and there will be a handful of people that can beat you with speed.

So anyone who is around 60 seconds and more, aren't worth of having the title? Just because they aren't hitting 100+ TPM?

Exactly. 60 + second speeds are slow compared to how fast people can go. Even if you are at top performance for everything besides speed you will be defeated by players that are much faster than you and have balanced skill. There are hundreds of players that could beat someone below 100 tpm regardless of how skilled they are at that tpm. I wouldn't consider someone who is immensely slower than very many others a grand master. You can if you want.

[KeroKai]

I'd say that rank 20 with a sprint time of about 1 minute sounds accurate, assuming they are also T-spinner. Like myself, these players are people who are in the intermediate stage between the point score of 19000-19500 meaning that we can take on most level 19s with no problem but struggle with the more difficult rank 20 opponents (Those who hold 999 points consistently...)

Otherwise I reckon it's just taking the titles in TF a little too seriously imo. Most tetris fans have seen the video of the guy playing TGM invisible mode, and do understand that being rank 20 on TF doesn't mean that they are the best in the world.

It all comes down to this.
How would you even define a grandmaster? Is it purely TGM that assigns that title? Otherwise it seems that we'd just be using subjective measures of what we believe 'passes' in our eyes.

That is even worse because he is over 1 minute and rank 20, shows how the rankings work on TF.

Of course I'm not saying 1 minute is bad but it is usually in the beginning phase of playing tetris. Definitely not the Grand Master phase lol.

As someone who has played a little over 1 year my advice is to play blockbox and nullpo way more than you play TF. I prefer blockbox~ I spent my first couple tetris months on blockles, then I switched over to blockbox and in 3 months I went from over 1 minute to around 32 seconds. Then I quit for a year and just started playing a couple weeks ago to be sub 30.

The beginning phase?

Why is speed so emphasised anyhow?
I'd rather be a person that knows how to stack efficiently and utilise pieces well than someone who is a speed demon. In my eyes, the latter is something that comes with time and practice where as the former is something that can be consciously studied.

I've had this argument before with a friend who felt there was no skill in tetris, merely that it was a matter of memorisation through repetition and getting used to placing blocks in certain places. That there was no conscious effort in the building process. It's all unconscious play.

[Someone2knoe]

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Why is speed so emphasised anyhow?[/quote]
Because its important? If two decent people stack the same, the faster person will win. To a point you can beat someone who stacks better than you if you are faster. It works the other way too, you can beat someone faster than you by stacking better. It all depends on the degree of speed and the degree of stacking skill.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]I'd rather be a person that knows how to stack efficiently and utilise pieces well than someone who is a speed demon. [/quote]

I'd rather be both.

Its not an either-or situation you can be well practiced in both. Just because I am saying speed is important I'm not saying stacking efficiently is not important. The best players are very balanced in terms of speed and other skills. That is why if you are top ranked, you should be pretty balanced. In terms of speed you should be able to break 60 seconds.


[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]In my eyes, the latter is something that comes with time and practice where as the former is something that can be consciously studied[/quote]

You can gain skill in either with time and practice, and you can consciously study both.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]I've had this argument before with a friend who felt there was no skill in tetris, merely that it was a matter of memorisation through repetition[/quote]

Memorization through repetition is part of practice. Are you saying there is no skill involved because you can practice?

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]
I've had this argument before with a friend who felt there was no skill in tetris, merely that it was a matter of memorisation through repetition and getting used to placing blocks in certain places. That there was no conscious effort in the building process. It's all unconscious play.[/quote]

How does that prove that there is no skill involved? Are you saying a great chess player has no skill, because he just memorized situations and played many games(repetition)? Granted there are new situations that chess players find themselves in that they have to react to, but the same with tetris lol..


[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]How would you even define a grandmaster? Is it purely TGM that assigns that title? Otherwise it seems that we'd just be using subjective measures of what we believe 'passes' in our eyes.[/quote]

Its not even subjective, the problem is that many people reach the top rank. So the rank 20's aren't really distinguishable skill-wise. There are  3 seperate skill levels in rank 20 itself.

[KeroKai]

Because its important? If two decent people stack the same, the faster person will win. To a point you can beat someone who stacks better than you if you are faster. It works the other way too, you can beat someone faster than you by stacking better. It all depends on the degree of speed and the degree of stacking skill

Wouldn't that be dependent on how much faster the person is? We all usually agree that a person T-spinning or knowing his all-spin fixes has a considerable advantage over the fast tetris player, because even though their TPM is much greater... their APM is going to average out to be the same.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]
I'd rather be both.

Its not an either-or situation you can be well practiced in both. Just because I am saying speed is important I'm not saying stacking efficiently is not important. The best players are very balanced in terms of speed and other skills. That is why if you are top ranked, you should be pretty balanced. In terms of speed you should be able to break 60 seconds.
[/quote]

As would I.
But in the situation where I'm forced to choose to focus on becoming faster downstacking, or learning the different methods of stacking and spins. I'd opt for the spins any day because I see it as more valuable. I suppose it's for this reason I've been curious about the tetris game where both players are limited by speed, forcing all the players to downstack more effectively/send lines over more effectively. It's for this reason I started off T-spinning first before I started focusing on getting my speed down. When I beat a player by sheer speed, it's less satisfying than beating a faster player due to the way I stacked.

I suppose it should be obvious that those who place more concern over speed, have a tendancy to be dissatisfied by the speed cap within TF.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]
You can gain skill in either with time and practice, and you can consciously study both. [/quote] The only thing that can be studied for speed imo is finesse. T-spins/All-spins/Stacking methods. These can all be studied without playing the game. When someone comes to you asking how to improve their 40L... "Stack faster" is abit of a pointless (obvious) advice, rather people go on to explain stuff like block patterns etc.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]
Memorization through repetition is part of practice. Are you saying there is no skill involved because you can practice?
How does that prove that there is no skill involved? Are you saying a great chess player has no skill, because he just memorized situations and played many games(repetition)?

Granted there are new situations that chess players find themselves in that they have to react to, but the same with tetris lol..[/quote]

Not at all. In fact I disagreed with the dude. All I'm saying is that when it comes to learning and all that, memorisation is the least skillful part if we consider everything a skill. It applies to exam papers as well, figuring out stuff through logic and all that or regurgitating information. Which one are you more likely to praise someone for when they do well?

The skill attained through chess repitition is different imo. People start developing strategies and tactics, which is different to memorising certain moves. Those who don't will bound to fail in the long run even if they can replicate the same moves as there's no overall understanding to help them face new situations. If I were to apply this to tetris, the practice element allows people to develop building block patterns/downstacking methods. But ignoring the fact that I've completely lost the point of what I'm saying...

All these stuff are different to speed and can be practiced without playing the game. Granted, I'm not sure how many other tetris players have doodled on a piece of paper... =/


[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]
Its not even subjective, the problem is that many people reach the top rank. So the rank 20's aren't really distinguishable skill-wise. There are  3 seperate skill levels in rank 20 itself.
[/quote]

There are 3 seperate skill levels?
What are these?

[Someone2knoe]

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--] Wouldn't that be dependent on how much faster the person is?
[/quote]

Yes. You even quoted me saying that statement when you wrote that response.

Here it is in case you have trouble finding it:

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]It all depends on the degree of speed and the degree of stacking skill[/quote]

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]We all usually agree that a person T-spinning or knowing his all-spin fixes has a considerable advantage over the fast tetris player, because even though their TPM is much greater... their APM is going to average out to be the same.
[/quote]

That statement isn't even necessarily true. The fast player can t-spin and know his spin fixes. You keep describing it as either-or. Just because you have speed doesn't mean you can't t-spin...

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]    

But in the situation where I'm forced to choose to focus on becoming faster downstacking, or learning the different methods of stacking and spins.

[/quote]

What situation is that? You think of everything as either-or. if you only focus on one aspect of gameplay you will suck at vs, because its about being balanced.

Its not like if you practice downstacking you will never be able to practice stacking. It is ridiculous to say you have to choose one aspect of gameplay to practice, and ignore the others.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]
I suppose it should be obvious that those who place more concern over speed, have a tendancy to be dissatisfied by the speed cap within TF. [/quote]

Anyone who plays, regardless of whether or not they place more concern with speed should be dissatisfied with TF settings. Unless TF presets match your preference. This is why many people who play clones are dissatisfied but people who mainly play TF don't mind playing with that limitation or even don't know about it.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]The only thing that can be studied for speed imo is finesse.[/quote]

Okay? your point?

Btw just because finesse is one word doesn't mean there is not a lot of content regarding it.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]There are 3 separate skill levels?
What are these?[/quote]

Noob Rank 20s
Intermediate Rank 20s
Insane Rank 20s

The point is that there shouldn't be so many people ranked 20 if they have a huge difference in playing capabilities within that rank. 3 separate skill levels wasn't to be specific but explain what I mean through exaggeration.