best center 4 wide defense

[blazen_azn]

Since chris4wide is again in the  top 16 of TTO

Is it a general consensus that I wouldn't be in the top 16 without 4widing my way in?

I personally think its a mental block that a lot of people struggle with. If you guys want to experiment and whatnot, I'd be more than happy to 4w you. Also, are there other people 4widing out there, I'd love to try and counter them.

It's also safe to say an md for a 4wider completely ruins their combo, and is not really recoverable in a reasonable manner. It goes both ways. Someone like SJ and Microblizz are freestyle tspinners. The only reason they're misdropping is because 4w and tournament settings put them out of their element.

The community itself doesn't have many 4widers because the majority of you guys show general disgust towards them. It's not a surprise I don't hang around here that often anymore. I was 4w free for about a year, and the same attitude was shown towards me, so I reverted back to doing it in tournament settings and for kicks in 6p rooms on tf. I would beat people without a 4w, and still get crap for four widing in the past. Take a step back and see how messed up that is.

No one really is used  to the pressure that 4w puts on them, simply because you guys did a wonderful job of killing them all off. It also isn't just so "EZ AND OP" to 4w. Not many people are able to pull it off. It isn't the most skillful thing, but it isn't a mindless win. Maybe I made it look too easy vs Microblizz (I just happened to be 4widing better than I had ever done before), but actually watch my games with SJ--I messed it up more than I actually succeeded, and he punished me a good number of times. Before you try and counter it, actually try it out to see where it fails and how it fails.

A decent amount of you guys shouldn't worry about this, just work on your fundamentals and downstacking.

I get the feeling that this comment has potential for starting a lovely circlejerk. I'll check in occasionally.

[Aaron]

The best defense seems to be some Preparation-H and a doughnut shaped pillow, because everyone gets so unnecessarily butthurt over 4-wide combos.

There is a skill in 4-widing. As Chris said in the last post, a misdrop usually renders it useless. In normal gameplay, a misdrop is much more likely to be fixed in a timely manner. But this or this? GG. There is also a skill in knowing which pieces to use and in which order, holding I pieces to use as "skips," and knowing some basic spins. Unlike two-wides and your mother, jamming anything in the hole won't cut it.

TTC also had poor foresight in designing the combo table, I agree that it's overpowered, because they only thought people would do two-wide combos. This is a case of hate the game, not the player.

[Profane]

Chris I wouldnt take it to personal.  I know some people might give you flack about using the strategy but I think most skilled players realize that it requires a level of skill to execute.  Im not however gonna pretend I personally like being 4 wided lol mostly because I suck at using it myself as a counter so when I play someone of equal or greater other skills im usually dominated in the score but i feel as though the only real difference may be our opening.

Part of what makes it so powerful is how it affects the mental of your opponent so dont let this thread do just that to you before your match with Hahaha.  Im really interested to see how he handles the 4 wide

[VladtheImpala]

The logic for many people's hate of the 4w is pretty shaky. People talk about the "mental advantage" and how it pressures a player pretty heavily not to misdrop when playing a 4widing player, but i feel like these same people fail to consider the other side, i.e. the pressure on the 4widing player not to misdrop. i.e. this game in SJ and chrisw's match: http://youtu.be/ne0gYVp3v-s?t=2m58s
(yes Aaron and a few others have said this, but i'm reiterating)

Also caffeine, i also disagree with the validity of your analysis in accurately determining the strength of the 4w (piece count is skewed as Antifate said etc.). But even if we take your calculations to be an accurate representation of the dt cannon vs the 4wide, what do we get? you said the difference in efficiency was 0.806 to 0.733, which hardly seems like a difference that would instantly end the game, which is the main complaint about the 4wide. Sure you could say that the 4widing player comes out "ahead" because their opening sent lines more efficiently, but by the same logic one could argue that tspinning openings are hard counters to tetris openings because they are more efficient, which is obviously not true. I feel like the very calculations that you did show that it is quite possible to survive the 4w, and thus the 4w is not overpowered, just a slightly more efficient opening attack with slightly less consistency. I'm not going to say that it's not a strong and viable strategy. It's a hard counter to early misdrops, and given a certain amount of luck it can instantly end a game, but I think the amount of complaining and hate-mongering over it is a little ridiculous.

I also feel like the 2 prime suspects in this 4w inquisition (WendyLoL and chrisw) have used the 4w extensively, but it hasn't been the exclusive factor in their success. They use it as a strong opening strategy, but it is not without risk, and often it is not enough to give them a decisive advantage. Most of chris and wendy's wins have been from their strong midgame play rather than their 4widing.

TL;DR
chris and wendy actually good players, 4wide is not completely imbalanced.

Don't deride the four wide!  

[Integration]

Is it a general consensus that I wouldn't be in the top 16 without 4widing my way in?

I don't think this is a general consensus. It's a bit hypothetical though. You use 4-widing as your secret strategy. You just it only when you have to. Without 4-widing, you would have had a hard time against MicroBlizz last year. Without the top 16 ranking of last year, you would have met hebo-MAI this year in the round of last 32.

To clarify: I think 4-widing is a legal strategy in Tetris Friends, but it should be forbidden in Tetris Online Poland (stronger combo table, no lineclear delay). If I played guideline games, I would perhaps 4-wide, too. However, I can understand the hatred for 4-wide. It makes a pretty deterministic game (that's what I criticize guideline for) a gambling game. You have to shorten the combo, but the only fast way to do that is sending clean garbage, which can be used against you under circumstances. One misdrop (on both sides) and it's almost GG.

On another node, a line clear should ever send more than 3 lines. Why is there no game where the combo table stops at 3?

[eevor]

I think mentioning chrisw really isn't fair. Yes, he has 4w as an extremely powerful part of his game. So does lapsi. And larry.
And no one is commenting on how good chris is in other aspects. He outplayed SirJeivus, he didn't beat him just with the 4w.

I too don't like 4w, but it's mainly cause I also panic when someone pulls it on me, I can't do it as well. And I used to be really against 4w, but have realized since that it's a perfectly good strategy, and is something you also need to be really good at for it to work. Plus it's not a magic wand that will enable you to beat people better that you. Larry was 1/6 when using 4w vs. qmk, if I'm not mistaken.

I think we should keep this discussion on methods to 4w-countering, and stop bitchin how 4w sucks.
So on that topic, I tend to do a C-spin, praying that a PC opportunity will occur.
Sometimes I try to do a PC, but very rare, mostly if the opponent isn't that fast, cause if I mess it up then I'm in a pretty bad position.

[MicroBlizz]

And no one is commenting on how good chris is in other aspects. He outplayed SirJeivus, he didn't beat him just with the 4w.

Johnny and I were commentating about how solid ChrisW's mid-game was despite the big emphasis on his middle 4w. I was pretty cynical at one point as well when there was controversy about whether or not ChrisW deserved to be in the playoffs. In actuality, I think he's a great player. Solid fundamentals and consistency are his main benefactors, not his 4w. In a different way, I can relate to Chris. Even recently people still thought I was just another fast player but I think sometimes people have a tendency to look at a person who doesn't have any other clear advantages and cast them away as "one trick ponies".

I've noticed there's been a lot of hate directed towards ChrisW mainly because of his 4w. The success he's shown because of the 4w is probably what sprouted this and I don't think that's fair. I think it's important to keep in mind that there are plenty of other players who 4w as well like Chris indicated (Larry, kennyboy, lapsi). In a lot of instances, the 4w can enhance a player's gameplay and give them the advantage. With this in mind, if a player wins does it really matter how they do it? Despite how we feel about the 4w (I personally hate it), it's still a part of the game and should be treated as such. I agree with Chris when he says that there's a mental and psychological block the 4w induces because we've shunned it for so long as an illegitimate strategy that we don't have a lot of knowledge in terms of how to counter it. Even more important, I think instead of questioning a player's abilities based on their decision to use the 4w, assessing our own abilities against the 4w is even more important. Our tactics so far have indicated a certain inferiority to the power of the 4w and maybe this is an indication that we need to improve certain aspects of our style/strategy.

[Antifate]

Real talk alert. Feel free to skip this post (most of it is common sense).

Simply because it is easier to stack on wider surfaces than narrower ones. When you split a surface into two (such as in center 4-widing), you can no longer use the columns adjacent to the sides where they could be connected. You lose placement options as a result. From personal experience, I've found it much easier to complete a side 4-wide without needing to "dump" pieces or create temporary gaps. If your experience is different, then more power to you.
I made a claim, and I presented evidence to support my claim. You have merely pointed out that there are more ways than one to compare openings. You haven't actually shown why the particular way I did was "hilariously bad."

The garbage per piece analysis was enough to serve the purpose of showing why I don't believe the DT-cannon to be that great a defense against 4-widing. Per piece comparison is a more logical way to evaluate than the "speed" of an opening, since speed is not actually a property of the opening in itself. It depends on the player and also on how much he's practiced a particular opening. It's true that consistency is important, but there are players who are able to be consistent with either opening. Garbage-canceling wasn't relevant to the comparison since I was analyzing and replying to morningpee's example. (In which the DTer deliberately sends the garbage before it can be canceled to limit the height of the 4-wide.) That goes hand and hand with timing. As for flexibility and the other unnamed "too many factors," I can't really say I am that persuaded to by their mere existence alone to change my view. I am interested to learn how you think they influence the value of each opening, though.
While that's important, it wasn't necessary to address in my post. If you give the DTer another 15 pieces, and let's say he manages to pull off another TSD and TST, then he will still end up under 0.8.

On the topic of side 4w... If you're at the level where side 4w feels easier to stack, practice center 4w more. Being bad at something shouldn't shade how one views the game (though that's pretty much what's happening in this entire thread haha), especially if you want to go above anecdotal arguments. You were okay at center 4w last I checked. Though you're (likely) presenting side 4w as an accessible option for scrubs people who haven't tried center 4w, let's not pretend the strategy has any advantages over center 4w. To reiterate, center 4w can be done without soft drops with any starting piece combination (standard randomizer/3+preview/etc.) and side 4w is slower to combo down and riskier to stack. Honestly, I don't think this is too important or anything a player can't instantly realize on his or her own, but I guess it's worth noting.

Instead, what I take issue with is your presentation of DT vs. 4w (and general perspective on 4w).

You've made a bunch of assumptions in calculating your garbage per piece number and are hilariously inconsistent at applying it. To start, you claim to be analyzing the scenario morningpee presented (indeed, this is your excuse for ignoring garbage canceling   ), but don't seem to be looking at it at all.

Just about the only thing you use from the fumens presented is the number of pieces. You then fit this number of pieces into your own understanding of the two openings. First, your line calculation is sloppy to the point of being deceitful. You ignore the 3 residues needed to prime the combo. In the end the actual number of residues one has to devote to stacking the columns is 73. Now while this is enough to theoretically stack 12 rows with one residue left over, there is just that, one residue left over. The chance of actually converting those 73 (76) blocks into the 12 rows (12 rows and 3 residues) isn't 100% (you would have to end with a stack that's very flat). In fact, I'd say the chances of being able to stack like that are quite small. If you can guarantee that it can be done under standard rules, I'll concede this point. Regardless, even really good players like chrisw can't do this consistently (yet) in a competitive match.

Indeed, if you actually looked at the situation you purport to be analyzing, you'll notice that chrisw only has 10 lines ready to combo through, despite placing 19 pieces. Extending your silly garbage per piece analysis... we will suppose chrisw clears that in 10 pieces, scoring a 9 combo, and sending 17 lines in 29 pieces. This is a garbage per piece value of ~.586. Which is less than .733, what you calculated for the DT cannon.

Wait... lower than that of the DT cannon?   In fact, we can allot an extra combo line just for fun, bringing the total attack / piece ratio to 21 / 30. This is still below the value you got for a DT.

So:

- You disregard garbage canceling (and many other factors) because it's not relevant to the example you're talking about.
- You fail to analyze the example you're talking about, using sloppy assumptions and ultimately coming out with untrustworthy results.

Most of this can be tied to the fact that garbage per piece is an awful metric, especially for combo strategies that (gasp) aim to maximize garbage per piece at the cost of control over the flow of the game. You're taking the most outstanding aspect of one strategy and using that as your metric of comparison. You might as well compare things to ST-stacking by the number of T-spin doubles sent. On that note, it should be noted that ST-stacking has a pretty damn high garbage per piece ratio. But it is an awful way to play multiplayer (shoutouts to AlexSweden). Why is it an awful way to play multiplayer? Because multiplayer is not Ultra. And sadly, garbage canceling, speed, timing, and all those factors I admittedly didn't define, come into play! These are all things you ignore by looking at garbage per piece numbers in isolation. Believe it or not, offensive efficiency isn't the name of the game (it's Tetris). I'd argue that defensive efficiency is, but that's besides the point. If you're interested, I think larry would be happy to teach you a bit about how important defensive play and reading the flow of the game is.

In fact I really hold strongly to the fact that you can't understand/evaluate openings, or Tetris in general, with naive garbage sent comparisons--there's so much more to the game!

I'll admit that my list of "factors" was incredibly vague and really didn't deserve a response (thanks anyway). I'll try to clear that up now. As I suggested before, 4w (and combo techniques in general) sacrifice some aspects to maximize attacking power. I'll try to quickly bring some of those to attention. I'll admit that my understanding of some of these terms may differ subtly from others. Hopefully this will clear up what I was talking about.  

Power - the amount of lines a pattern sends.
Speed - how fast a pattern can be placed/cleared (always assuming uniform piece-piece speed).
Timing - the distribution of line clearing/sending over time.
Consistency - how often a pattern can be executed.
Flexibility - how well a pattern can link into others, deals with misdrops, or be safely aborted.

P.S. Remember what global field these factors play in--garbage canceling exists! So does a ceiling - you can't stack on those columns if they're above your field already!

I'm probably missing a few important concepts, but I hope you get the point. These factors all affect how "good" an opening is. Unfortunately, without making at least an attempt to include them in your analysis, you end up really misrepresenting two good openings and spreading the toxic "4w OP" notion that pervades the community.

It's funny that the two best players in this thread (sorry kids, maybe TTOIV) don't seem too miffed about 4w at all.

Is it a general consensus that I wouldn't be in the top 16 without 4widing my way in?

I personally think its a mental block that a lot of people struggle with. If you guys want to experiment and whatnot, I'd be more than happy to 4w you. Also, are there other people 4widing out there, I'd love to try and counter them.

It's also safe to say an md for a 4wider completely ruins their combo, and is not really recoverable in a reasonable manner. It goes both ways. Someone like SJ and Microblizz are freestyle tspinners. The only reason they're misdropping is because 4w and tournament settings put them out of their element.

The community itself doesn't have many 4widers because the majority of you guys show general disgust towards them. It's not a surprise I don't hang around here that often anymore. I was 4w free for about a year, and the same attitude was shown towards me, so I reverted back to doing it in tournament settings and for kicks in 6p rooms on tf. I would beat people without a 4w, and still get crap for four widing in the past. Take a step back and see how messed up that is.

No one really is used  to the pressure that 4w puts on them, simply because you guys did a wonderful job of killing them all off. It also isn't just so "EZ AND OP" to 4w. Not many people are able to pull it off. It isn't the most skillful thing, but it isn't a mindless win. Maybe I made it look too easy vs Microblizz (I just happened to be 4widing better than I had ever done before), but actually watch my games with SJ--I messed it up more than I actually succeeded, and he punished me a good number of times. Before you try and counter it, actually try it out to see where it fails and how it fails.

A decent amount of you guys shouldn't worry about this, just work on your fundamentals and downstacking.

I get the feeling that this comment has potential for starting a lovely circlejerk. I'll check in occasionally.

 Get on Nullpo more often!

I'd also be willing to defend against anyone's 4w too, if they'd like to test out some theorycrafting lol.

[Paul676]

"side 4w is...riskier to stack."

Your post would be decent if you didn't put something blatantly false in it. Side 4-wide is quicker to stack than centre 4-wide because it's basically quite similar to tetris stacking in that you have a larger stack to work with, which is quicker to stack than 3-3 - not just because 'we haven't practised 3-3 stacking enough'.

But seriously, are you trying to say that side 4-wide has absolutely no benefits vs center 4-wide? And what would you say is a good counter to center 4-wide, the DT cannon or something else?

[Antifate]

By riskier, I was suggesting that side 4w leads to death more often as spikes will top it out more easily. Center 4w is nice in that your incoming piece will be in the well, so you won't get topped out from anything other than a massive spike. Considering that these 4w strategies can easily have 15+ line deep wells, center 4w provides a pretty big advantage in top-out protection as incoming pieces will fall into a well, rather than on your stack (which would cause an instant top-out if the incoming piece ends up above the playing field). In this sense, side 4w riskier. Sorry if I wasn't clear, I thought you well understood this already. I'm guessing we're not seeing eye-to-eye on a basic definition somewhere, because I could have sworn I've seen you talk about this concept before!

In any case, I'll safely reject your claim that my own claim (claimception) is blatantly false in an objective sense, if only that risk evaluations are known to differ from person to person (e.g. risk adverse - risk neutral - risk seeking personalities) and that which may be risky for myself may seem safe to you (what a baller!).

Next, I don't think side 4w is easier to stack than center 4w, especially when you take the risk into account (you have to pay more attention to incoming attacks). Personally, I feel that they're equally easy to stack. Just... don't make holes? I'm sure you know that lots of pieces lend themselves to pretty neat 3 wide stacks as well. Anyway, I didn't say either was faster or slower. They're essentially the same opening piece-count-wise, so they have the same speed. Just one doesn't abuse how the topping out mechanics work.

Because of this, I'd say that side 4w has no advantages over center 4w. Even if one supposes that ease of stacking due to stack width is an advantage (I disagree--side 4w's vulnerabilities cause distractions--more watching the opponent's field and considering defensive options), you should also consider that, at least for the openings of matches, even mediocre players can see 4-5 pieces in advance, and are capable of making smart stacking decisions, even if they wane when the chaos of the midgame comes. After all, there is minimal interference from the opponent during openings (they gotta build up too!). If one can't stack center 4w as an opening, when one has essentially full control over one's field, then yeah I'd suggest some practice would be good. And yes, one actually needs to practice 4w (!). This goes double for TF, where the general game speed is slower than in other competitive clones and the correct ways (there are multiple) to center 4w from any starting piece configuration are pretty easy to see. Center 4w is actually incredibly easy to set up. Indeed, this is why some people complain about it!

Ultimately, I don't see any advantages for side 4w. I see a disadvantage in its relative vulnerability to topping out compared to a center strategy though. Oh yeah side 4w is also slower to combo down, as again, incoming pieces don't start in the well. Even if there are some advantages to side 4w (I won't pretend to be an expert on it), I highly doubt they outweigh the disadvantages. Supporting this notion, I usually see experienced "pros" center 4w, and I think high levels of play are worth more in strategy discussions. Though who knows, side 4w might very well be useful in lower level games. I don't really think that'll influence my perspective though. Because I want to be the very best! And I believe everyone else should too think and work towards playing on a high level.

Next, I voted for DT in the poll, but I think any good aggression is fine. DT is just easy to learn, consistent, and spiky. If worse comes to worse, 4w should obviously come out even against 4w. I'm, in general, opposed to the idea of "counters" though. I find that the concept of an advantageous position in Tetris is quite wishy-washy and convoluted by too many factors for me to make any broad judgments. I feel that, more often than not, you can get to a workable midgame by just playing how you want to play.

Indeed, I think things would be just fine if people played how they wanted to play, and didn't dislike others for it...

[Paul676]

Why is spiky bad for a center 4-wider? I think it doesn't matter in any way, as their pieces spawn in the well?

Surely you're having your cake and eating it when you say that side 4-wide isn't quicker to stack but centre 4-wide is quicker to clear? One has better finesse in stacking, the other has better finesse in clearing, and vice versa. Side 4-wide is better finesse-wise in stacking (for the same reason that centre 4-wide has better finesse in clearing), whilst centre 4-wide has better finesse in clearing (for the same reason that side 4-wide has the better finesse in stacking). Do you at least agree in that regard?

If you do, the conclusion is that all things being equal (i.e. you don't naturally stack centre 4-wide quicker in sprint, with whatever amount of time taken for the extra finesse taken out of account (this is impossible in reality I know, but I'm sure you know what I mean) than a normal stack: at most, you stack them equally quickly. Another way of putting it is that with x amount of practice, you are not gonna become wildly quicker at stacking centre-4-wide than normal stacking), then side 4-wide is quicker to stack.

I think a side 4-wide is very limited in what it can do against anything really but a centre 4-wide - but you're not gonna get spiked out by a centre 4-wide in the same way as you would with a DT cannon, so as a tactic against it, you've not got that element of risk that you talk about. Furthermore, the tactic I am suggesting is specifically to clear your 4-wide before they start clearing theirs. Therefore centre 4-wide is a riskier ploy in that scenario, as it is a little bit harder and slower to stack (though only a little bit in the case of top players). In this thread we are not judging them as openings against each different type of opening, but merely what is better when one is played against the other.

By the way, what do you all reckon to the idea of doing a double or t-spin single into a t-spin double, then spamming t-spin doubles/triples? The first lucky hole only gives 1 or 2 lines, rather than a free Tetris - and the chance of 2 lucky holes coming up is 0.4*0.3 (can't be the same column as 1st send), which is 0.12. They may still be able to take it if they stack their sides flat, but it is far less of a risk than a tsd start, which has 0.4 chance of a 4 high lucky hole - which will almost certainly be the killer blow.

[Shizi]

didn't read all the comments but..

best mid 4 wide defense is your own mid 4 wide
2nd best is side 4 wide

anyone that says otherwise has not played against someone that can stack a 4 wide in seconds

people also need to get off blazns nuts

it's common knowledge that 4w is the best opening in tetris friends. In a tournament you always bring out your best.

coming from tnet, i thought the 7 randomizer bag was op in blockbox
then t-spins came along and i thought that was op. clear 2 lines to send 4?

just learn how to 4wide and quit crying

[caffeine]

Though you're (likely) presenting side 4w as an accessible option for scrubs people who haven't tried center 4w, let's not pretend the strategy has any advantages over center 4w.

Then to clarify my position, I would only advise anyone to side 4w against a center 4w or another side 4w. Those are the only cases where it's safe to do so.

Wait... lower than that of the DT cannon?   In fact, we can allot an extra combo line just for fun, bringing the total attack / piece ratio to 21 / 30. This is still below the value you got for a DT.

That's true. I didn't take into account residue. In cases where the T comes very early in the 3rd bag, you're right that a DT Cannon can out- attack per tetromino (APT) a 4w. Thanks for that. I did a quick sketch instead of taking my time with a more thorough analysis. I apologize about that. Depending how soon the T comes in the third bag, and if you play piece for piece, I suspect the DT Cannon will come out ahead in APT sometimes, and sometimes the 4w will come out ahead.

You're taking the most outstanding aspect of one strategy and using that as your metric of comparison. You might as well compare things to ST-stacking by the number of T-spin doubles sent. On that note, it should be noted that ST-stacking has a pretty damn high garbage per piece ratio. But it is an awful way to play multiplayer (shoutouts to AlexSweden). Why is it an awful way to play multiplayer? Because multiplayer is not Ultra. And sadly, garbage canceling, speed, timing, and all those factors I admittedly didn't define, come into play! These are all things you ignore by looking at garbage per piece numbers in isolation.

That's a good point. Take APM for example. When both player's TPM is the same, APM is exactly the same metric as APT. One would be foolish to judge a player solely by his APM. There are other factors to take into account. To take your own example, one could simply ST-stack until they top out for a great APM. That doesn't mean it's a good strategy. Yet, it is still a very useful way to evaluate a player's ability to win. Merely pointing out that there are other factors than APM does not mean that it is useless (as is the crux of your argument). In the opening, APT is especially relevant since there is not yet garbage on the playfield.

By the way, there is an important difference between ST-stacking and 4-widing. ST-stacking requires committing height to the middle 4 columns (the ones pieces spawn on). This enables the 4-wider to avoid topping out due to his upstack commitment. That is why an opponent can counter it in a way that they cannot counter a center 4-wide.

Believe it or not, offensive efficiency isn't the name of the game (it's Tetris). I'd argue that defensive efficiency is, but that's besides the point. If you're interested, I think larry would be happy to teach you a bit about how important defensive play and reading the flow of the game is.

Oh I believe it. In fact, I have written articles about just that topic.

[spoiler]

Finally, let's try to get rid of the stigma surrounding 4w. Less whine, stop calling people "chris4wide," etc.  

Is it a general consensus that I wouldn't be in the top 16 without 4widing my way in?

I think we should keep this discussion on methods to 4w-countering, and stop bitchin how 4w sucks.

spreading the toxic "4w OP" notion that pervades the community.

Don't deride the four wide!  

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]
Indeed, I think things would be just fine if people played how they wanted to play, and didn't dislike others for it...
[/quote]

people also need to get off blazns nuts

[/spoiler]

... I'd like to acknowledge how none of the posters in this thread have really displayed the sort of attitude y'all are criticizing. A couple of posters have mentioned how they don't like how it affects the game's balance. However, I believe no one has displayed negative attitudes towards players themselves. Integration has pointed out how the strategy is being used at the highest level at play, and discussing how to defend against it is a completely valid topic. Some of us have discussed how we think it's the best opening in the game and/or lacks an adequate defense. If you disagree, I suggest you explain why and show evidence. There's no reason to get touchy about it.

[Integration]

By the way, what do you all reckon to the idea of doing a double or t-spin single into a t-spin double, then spamming t-spin doubles/triples? The first lucky hole only gives 1 or 2 lines, rather than a free Tetris - and the chance of 2 lucky holes coming up is 0.4*0.3 (can't be the same column as 1st send), which is 0.12. They may still be able to take it if they stack their sides flat, but it is far less of a risk than a tsd start, which has 0.4 chance of a 4 high lucky hole - which will almost certainly be the killer blow.

That's the reason why I included T-Spin Single into T-Spin Double. In case of Tetris Online Poland you could also start with a T-Spin Mini into T-Spin Triple. This would send 9 lines if I am not misstaken.

[Paul676]

I thought as much - figured out why, so I thought I'd explain it