You’re weird.
My Bella does not have fucks to give… but I don’t have a team, so I’m low tier.
waiting on Mike Z to make Solos better.
Well I mean, WHAT’s weird about the way I play?
See above.
I feel the same way about your tager and Potemkin.
I don’t feel like it’s ham, it’s…“Heartfelt”?
I dont find anything weird about the way you play. Though you are unorthodox with your team strategies…
Other than that i see no weirdness, just skilled play (and a generous helping of invincible reversals) 
That alpha counter into Showstopper was slick as hell.
One thought that your first match raises: You really should have points in your BnB where you are comfortable going into a snap. When you started out by catching both his characters, you really should have at least killed the assist (since getting enough meter to kill both probably was infeasible). Double-snaps are good. Practice slipping the snap into your combo, and post-snap kills.
Pali complained that SG should be 3 out of 5.
But he was ahead 2-1, so he would’ve won a 2/3.
But… it was 3/5 so he lost in the end.
Gah, look up the definition of irony, guy.
I was inputting the command for the snap but it wouldn’t come out 
Also I don’t know how to double snap…
Pretty sure Guta has a tutorial on that somewhere.
If someone could find me his tutorial, that would be great. I don’t know where that would be located on here
Oh geeze, an hour?
Lulz looks like I got a lot of watching to do.
Don’t sweat it. Most of the video is of him screwing it up with Peacock. 
Is this ok?
Thank you, straight to the point.
Actually yeah, Brand, I was going to tell you the same thing…if you catch two people early on you should KNOW how to turn it into a snap. Not necessarily even a double snap kill, but costing the assist lots of life is always good.
Pali complained that 2/3 isn’t an accurate way to assess skill because there are too many random variables in SG
Pali hasn’t played in a month or so and was totally out of practice, while Mike wasn’t (blind assumption)
Pali would’ve won a 2/3 but over the course of the longer set, Mike came out on top
If I say that a FT10 is a better way to see who’s a better player than an FT1,
then run an FT10 against Daigo, win the first set and lose the next 10, is that “irony”?
Doesn’t that like, reinforce Pali’s point?
If anything, “irony” would’ve been if he had completely dominated 2 rounds and then got random out 3 times in a row (still not really, but at least to a certain extend), but this wasn’t the case.
Like when I do that, I try my hardest to go into a snap back, but it doesn’t want to come out. Do snaps only come out at a certain time?