"Average" competitive growth?

“How long does it take to get good?” is a fairly common question around these parts. In my own community in AZ, we hold weekly bootcamp seesions that put you on a station from 1 to 5, with 1 being the best players. Every hour for 4 hours, you get an opportunity to move up a station assuming you have the most wins at your station for the hour. By defeating the lowest performing member of the neighboring station, you move up.

In a setup like this, you can see the results of your training without spending money on a tournament. You’re not at station 1? Then you still have lots to learn! And of course, the learning never really stops even once you get there.

We’ve been having bootcamps for months now… and I’ve noticed a lot of players stagnating in their stations. Station 2 players tend to stay in station 2, 3 in 3, and so on. What bothers me, is that so many players have told me personally that they really want to improve their game; to get to the top and beat Sabre, SNK, and I. I know that it’s not something that you do overnight, and I know that SF4 in particular can be a difficult game to wrap your head around sometimes.

In my personal SF “career”, I went from total noob (February 2009) to good enough to get some big screen time at EVO 2009 and win $100 from Alex Valle amongst other things that I’ve been grateful for. I took every loss personally, tirelessly sharpening my game over and over again with the initial goal of winning local tournaments consistently. Upon reaching that goal, I began traveling when possible to try to level up further. I still want to be the best in the world, and Devastation and EVO this year will be the new benchmarks in my progress. When someone is stuck at station X for months, I have trouble showing empathy. I dedicated myself to mastering every aspect of the game that I possibly could, and the results have been numerous in different aspects of my life.

What is average for competitive growth? People enjoy Street Fighter for many reasons. For me, I primarily enjoy the tournament competition and the feeling of victory over a tough opponent (like Alex Valle). If that’s not what others enjoy, then that’s okay. But if someone says that they want to “get better”, and over the course of many months no true progress is made, what is the best way to proceed as far as improving the general skill level of the local community? I have no motivation to help those who won’t help themselves… and I wonder if I’m an asshole for thinking that.

Saying you want to get to the top and doing it are two different things. Almost everyone says they want to get good but how many people actually put the time and effort into it? If they really want to get better then they’re going to have to start analyzing their games and why they’re losing and they’re going to have to start playing more.

I also see another problem in your post. You say that people at level 2 play at station 2 and people at level 3 play at station 3. In order to get much better you have to play players much better than you. Playing people your level seems like casuals for fun, not for improvement. It’s not just about playing people better than you, it’s about, like you did yourself, traveling and seeking out new competition. A leaf in a river with no flow does not move, a leaf in a rushing river is forced to move.

Agreed overall but playing people too much better than you doesn’t really teach you anything. Unless you call getting ran a train on a learning experience. And playing people near your own skill level can foster improvement as well; its all about the context.

If I’m new to a game, I would prefer to go up against a god 24\7. Its the fastest way to get good.

I forget the chess players name, he’s only a kid. Like 17-18 @ this point now maybe older. However, this guy didn’t play chess against average players. He played against the cpu and the cpu was actually copying the greats, fischer, kasparov etc… He played against the masters like 14 hours a day non stop for years. Not sure but he’s one of the youngest grand masters ever iirc.

Someone who is familiar with chess, please let me know who this kid is again. I believe he’s currently kasparov’s student but having a hard time figuring out who he is.

IMO, going up against masters all day will probably make you a god like player. There are many ways up the mountain.

edit: found his name. Its magnus carlson. Google him.

I say a healthy mix of playing people better than you and those that are close to your skill level. Seeking out people weaker than you will only foster bad habits and is about as challenging as hitting the dummy on practice mode.

Look up the average time it takes for a person to master something, realize that not many people have near that level of dedication.

10,000 hours
that’s 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, for 5 years
or 3 years 7 months, working weekends

presto nasty stat

the speed in which a player develops depends on a lot of diff factors. for instance, the player pool: you get a bunch of even the worst players in the world playing some good people, no matter how much they suck they’re gonna get better fast even if they give the game very little thought.

to answer what you asked, if they play in a pool that’s much better than they are overall, they should be much noticeably closer to the level of the players in that pool within days (i’d say hours, but not everyone retains information the same). if it’s not a good pool then it can take as long as a month before they can get better if they just stay in the same pool and keep playing without seriously analyzing elements of the game and their playstyle on their own; days if they do seriously analyze. if they’re just not growing at all, then they either don’t understand what it is they’re trying to do or they don’t care

edit: the hell. was this in referral to people who aren’t FG players? my times were for FG players. I have no idea what it’s like for anyone who doesn’t have FG skill, sorry

bad habits of any kind will only be created if you play mindlessly and don’t completely understand why you’re doing what you’re doing

I don’t have a direct argument against avoiding weaker players. but I think that if you wanna become a good gamer then you need to be a slut, not a girlfriend. don’t play the same mother fuckers all the time, don’t play only the people from this place, don’t play only people better than you — hold back from making exclusions. you should experience as many players as you can, period, no matter whether they’re good TOO good weak, etc. there’s a bunch of different players that can give you different views and information… there can be certain things that they know that you can add to your own style or learn how to squash effectively from there on. some of the weakest players I’ve ever played were also some of the most helpful to me AND the most frustrating to beat. regardless of skill level, players in general give you great ideas on how to think about the game if you observe them… that’s what you should be looking for

take all the emphasis off of time and put it on learning & retaining new info and using it. one dude can practice every hour of every day and not be anywhere near as good as the dude who just plays for 15 minutes 5 days a week. that’s cause one’s learning and mastering new elements and the other one is just going over the same shit he already knows

Everyone learns at their own rates, if your asking that. There is no set time at which you can expect anyone to be at a certain level of any game. It’s about dedication, how fast you learn things, how often you play, previous gaming history, etc.

If I did put an average on it, it wouldn’t be very helpful.
It can take anywhere from 100 hours to 2 years, I guess, to be pretty decent at SF.

Yeah I think the majority of people who say they want to be a top player or get better don’t have the dedication, or let their egos block their progress.

However I’m not really sold on the idea of measuring progress the way AZ or Valle does it. I can’t think of a better way when doing these mass training sessions, but playing to win =/= playing to learn, and by stressing moving up on stations, you’re stressing playing to win. Some of the dirtiest players I know, whose skill level has been stagnant for as long as I can remember, are also the players I know who play to win more than anyone.

But here’s the thing- you’ve got 50% of the story. For every person who plays somebody better, then by definition there is a person who is playing somebody worse!!

Exactly. It’s the same with learning guitar or something. The Edge can probably pick up a song and play it on the 2nd attempt. It might take me 3 weeks of rehearsing. It’s partly to do with how much time, but also the quality of the rehearsing, your natural ability, external factors, etc. To try to put a number on it is an oversimplification.

I concur. Time-wise, it fluctuates, depending on the competition level, and character usage.