This is like…the PERFECT time for this interview, heheh
http://lowlandlions.com/blog/POST_EVO__SVB_2011_QA-3589.html
a small extract:
**BUT EVEN IN A BEST OF THREE THE BEST PLAYERS STILL WIN SURELY?
**
RH: Well, strong players will win for sure, and as for the best player winning? Well that’s a maybe, but these days there is far too much credit given to tournament wins in my opinion, and this is because the new generation do not fully understand the depth that player’s skills go to and how long it takes to get to a point where you can really say one is better than the other.
SF4 is not so shallow that all can be revealed in just four-nine rounds. Yet people take these matches and create their own player ranking lists. This kind of thing reminds me of players thinking they can take on top heads when they don’t have a chance. I think overall this clearly shows a lack of understanding for the real gap that exists between these players and top players.
It’s similar to trying to grade two players based on two games. It’s also many players like that that say stuff like: “Yeah he’s good, but where did he come in the tournament”? But I mean, “Really”? Is that all it is now? You’re not good unless you win a tournament or place top 8? That is ridiculous and totally stupid. I mean take Dieminion and Sanford Kelly, now these are clearly two of the best SF4 players in the US but where did they place in EVO? This for me shows you that you just cannot grade players based on tournament performance only.
**YES THIS IS TRUE. **
RH: I mean let’s look at SBO for example, Super Battle Opera is one game, just one game. Yet people still say stuff “Oh, so and so lost to so and so in SBO…” as if that proves or means anything. And even EVO or any other major. It’s only 2 matches people, just two matches. Winning two matches against anyone doesn’t make you better than them.
**HAVE YOU EVER FOUND THIS HAPPENING TO YOU? CAN YOU GIVE AN EXAMPLE OF WHERE THIS HAS HAPPENED IN YOUR CAREER?
**
RH: Well, I beat Filipino champ with Sagat the first 2 matches in a ft5 then he got 5 in a row. Latif got 3 games on me then I got 5 in a row. I beat Daigo in tournament when he was better than me. The truth is, in the first couple of games players are still feeling each other out and have not even nearly reached the peak of their game yet. It is foolish to think that a player’s (especially a top player’s) game is so simple it can be laid out in two matches. I mean just to put some random players on the table, do you really think you can fully understand a player like Alioune or Iyo or Justin Wong in merely 2 games?
If this is true then we are clearly playing the wrong game. It can’t be that deep at all if everyone/everything can become clear in just two games. There is room for change, and adaptation to change in such a short set but it‘s limited. However of course I know tournament organisers are bound to the use of such rules due to time restrictions and that is totally understandable. That isn’t what I’m complaining about.
I just think people need to realise that just because I beat Daigo and other world class players in tournaments it doesn’t make me better than them, or just because I lost to someone in a tournament, it doesnt make them better than me. I notice that people always use foolishness like this in their arguments and it needs to end because no truth is being laid out using this format to prove or disprove players.
Ok, so Poongko got 2 wins over Daigo, I mean, I admit because I saw it live, it was amazing. Especially the perfect at the end. But however amazing it was it was an amazing 2 wins, just 2, not 10 or 20 but just 2 lol.
Getting crazy and saying Poongko owns Daigo now is stupid. It’s almost as bad as someone beating you one game online and uploading it as if they want to make some sort of statement.