The great question is
Who fucking cares?
I’ll never be caught dead playing Sean so no.
same for me, right around 240.
I did 240-270
I am sleep deprived though so I will test this again tomorrow when I’m probably more alert.
Hope youre using crt monitors to check reaction time. （＾_＾）
https://labzerogames.com/iheartteyah/MilliaBlocker_v0.3.swf
This is more interesting. Checks your reaction time for blocking overheads.
I honestly feel like I’m gonna be stuck getting hit by UOH for the rest of my life with little hope of blocking a good percentage of them 
Will a 144hz 0ms tft do?
Yeah between refresh rate mismatch, video buffering, flash being a piece of shit, USB polling rate, and any other local sources of input delay, I’m not sure how accurate those things are.
I suspect we’re all a little better than most online reaction tests would indicate.
after my trip to japan… besides the CRT/non CRT issue, the CPS3 to console speed difference was a big deal to me. Yes percentage wise is a small difference, but to me was enough to be able to defend better. A slight difference that yet made it easier to block overheads, tech throws and parry stuff on reaction. No small feat I’d say. Only played Ken like a couple games but I’m sure my cMK hitconfim rate would be higher too.
[Yes I used to play arcade when we had a scene in Florence years ago, but at some point I believed that I was on nostalgia glasses, or just getting older thus worse reactions. Wrong. Not as big as online vs offline, but still different enough to matter]
Average reaction time to visual stimulus is between 180 and 240ms (aka, between 12 and 16 frames in FG terms), which is why most overheads in most games have more then 16 frames of startup, because you also cant identify most moves on their first frame, need to see a few frames first to recognize.
Auditory response time is usually about 80 to 100ms faster then the visual one (because visual data is delayed by about 80ms before being sent to visual cortex of the brain, for purposes of erasing blur from eye movements, combining pictures from both eyes into single image (deleting your nose, etc)).
Keep in mind, these are reaction times to any stimulus, where its just “press button to any new visual or audio stimulus”.
So, an average auditory response time can be as low as 5-6 frames, and cmk’s have 12 frame cancel window, so, if someone trains themselves to react to the sound of the hit, rather then to the color of the hitspark, there’s just enough time for a comfortable confirm, even with that minimum 4 frame hardware delay (but it does take a lot of practice, since you have to react to a specific stimulus, rather then just react to any stimulus, which actually increases the reaction time slightly).
I give Chris G credit for his skill but the only hit confirms he ever really showed great proficiency with were the Chun like ones. So for instance, Necro back mp, back mk, remy close mk, Sean close hk, etc. I never saw him use Ken so maybe I’m just missing the information/experience in that regard. He is a good player, though.
Lance, keeping in mind you mainly have Chun experience and offline experience against a player you yourself taught the game, I don’t think you’ll be beating ChrisG.
I am doing the reaction time thing on a laggy tv so maybe it’s off but so far I’m at 155, 185, 195, 207, 208, and several weird 239-280 marks that I blame on my neighbors. I noticed that if I’m not looking for green and instead just looking for change, I get the 170 average but if I wait to see if I got green, I get the 200s and that if I wait to get green and confirm to myself that I got a green, it gives me the 239- 280.
There were a few other good scores I got that I’ll admit were guesses. Those ones I mentioned above, though, were not.
Lance didn’t teach me anything
I hit it with sound. I think it’s exactly at the .17 mark with the amount of time you have to cancel it. It is a really hard confirm and for real, I think even the best players can only confirm it 50% of the time. Which is still pretty good. My success percentage is lower than that.
Ken would be even better than he is if his confirm was easier.
Numbers don’t mean anything from a silly little program.
Dander has better numbers than me but I can confirm 1000x better than him.
Not only do you have to react to a hit but you have to hold the trigger in the case of a parry.
Also, I think misfires should be classified different than if nothing comes out.
- it was a joke, I’ll probably never play ChrisG
- I did reasonably well vs most people I played at evo last year, don’t really think I need to defend my “credentials” or whatever
- isotopez is definitely better than me at 3s
I think Lance can take him!
This topic goes to show that most people have a poor understanding of reaction time. Now I don’t expect people to subscribe to Science (the journal) and look up mental chronometry studies, but generally I think people should understand that there’s a fundamental difference in capacity to respond to something that is totally random on timing and something you can expect.
Stuff like that reaction time website are a very poor measurement of reaction time when it comes to hit-confirms, which have an expected time of occurrence. Basically an ETA. Imagine what your reaction time readings would be on that site if it had a clock counting down to 00:00, at which point the light either stays red or turns green. Now, it’s not going to be 0ms reaction time. You do still have to interpret the color swap, but you no longer have to wait for a variably timed color swap.
It’s not even a good gauge for defensive actions in most scenarios, because defenders have to react to more than a single option. The incoming data from a defensive perspective isn’t as simple as a go/don’t-go experiment, making even more of a mess of a simple go/don’t-go test like what’s on that website.
What I’m saying is that most reaction time tests based on variable timings are a piss-poor gauge of real reaction time for things like competitive games. That’s on top of all the generic issues that other people have listed concerning refresh rates and other junk like that to mess it up. Don’t take reaction time tests seriously. If you want to know if you can do it or not go try it on random people 100x and try to pull an 60-80% success rate. The better the people you try with the more meaningful you can consider your numbers.
Also, what Msungo said about auditory reaction times being faster is correct. The exact amount depends on each individual, but they are faster. I wouldn’t go so far as to say any specific milliseconds faster, but it is a significant (i.e. noticeable) difference.
You might also want to keep in mind that motor skills help you respond faster as well. Try taking that reaction time test on that website once every day for an entire month. Do the whole test, but do it only once a day, every day, for a whole month. You’ll find that your reaction time gets faster. You might start with a 250 and end up with a 200. Even though the test is variably timed, your body can learn to queue up and be prepped for the action. Add an auditory queue and you’ll go even faster. Swap it over to a non-variable timed event and you’ll go even faster. Add a visual count-down and you’ll go even faster, etc.
Basically, there’s a lot of context to reaction time. You can’t use a generic test to figure it out. It has to be specifically tailored to the event to get any meaningful number. I would not be surprised at all if there are people who play 3S who can react within 100ms to specific things. I can’t. I basically just roll my potato hands and face all over my stick or pad and hope that Ibuki does stuff that works.
All of this explains why Chris G is always seen wearing 19 pairs of headphones at once. He clearly understands the secrets of reaction speed. It’s all in the ears.
Well this round of the cr.mk confirm discussion has produced a minimum of bickering and even a few interesting conversations. Repeat questions aren’t always a bad thing I suppose.
Does this mean I should start a thread as to why the Stomp is a good move?
Everything is good in moderation or at least once, next discussion.