Menu
By:
Filters
What's new

Mike Ross' Matchup Philosophy

Gurpwnder

Gurpwnder

Saikyo Student
If any of you watch the Gootecks and Mike Ross show, Mike brought up an interesting point regarding matchups during episode 4.

Here's a link to the video:
http://www.dailymotion.com/gootecksandmikeross#video=x1a9gh6
(13:55ish onwards).

Mr. Ross claims that there should only be two numbers used in matchups: 5:5 and 10:0.

Why? Mike claims that if a character has an advantage in a matchup, that the character should be able to win that matchup every time. He does not believe in 6-4's, 7-3's and the like.

What are your thoughts on Mike's philosophy?
 
Last edited:
Mikemetroid

Mikemetroid

Who hired this guy, WTF?
Lead Moderator
He just really simplifies it to adv, disadv, and even. He knows that 10-0s just don't really exist in modern games though...

anyway inb4 thread goes batshit crazy
 
Vulcan Hades

Vulcan Hades

Champion
The way I see it is.. Any 4-6 and 3-7 matchup can become 5-5 if the player has enough matchup experience and MU knowledge (e.g. SnakeEyes Gief vs Sagat or DJT Cyrax vs Kabal). A matchup is only disadvantage when one of the players hasn't done their homework on it.

Then you have your 8-2, 9-1 and 10-0 unwinnable matchups. Where no amount of practice and knowledge can make a difference. With enought grinding you can make them look 3-7 at best but they'll always be bad matchups.
 
Last edited:
THTB

THTB

Arez | Booya | Riu48 - Rest Easy, Friends
Vulcan Hades said:
The way I see it is.. Any 4-6 and 3-7 matchup can become 5-5 if the player has enough matchup experience and MU knowledge (e.g. SnakeEyes Gief vs Sagat). A matchup is only disadvantage when one of the players hasn't done their homework on it.

Then you have your 8-2, 9-1 and 10-0 unwinnable matchups. Where no amount of practice and knowledge can make a difference.
Click to expand...
Pretty much how I see matchups, as a whole. And why I don't really mind 3-7s.
 
Gurpwnder

Gurpwnder

Saikyo Student
Vulcan Hades said:
The way I see it is.. Any 4-6 and 3-7 matchup can become 5-5 if the player has enough matchup experience and MU knowledge (e.g. SnakeEyes Gief vs Sagat). A matchup is only disadvantage when one of the players hasn't done their homework on it.

Then you have your 8-2, 9-1 and 10-0 unwinnable matchups. Where no amount of practice and knowledge can make a difference.
Click to expand...
This begs the question: If a character is believed to have a clear-cut advantage over the opponent in a matchup, why should that character ever lose to the opponent?
 
Vulcan Hades

Vulcan Hades

Champion
Yoaksssss said:
Mike Ross is the man. But I disagree with his "Philosophy"! @Vulcan Hades said it perfectly. I see what Mike is saying but the MU numbers are there to dictate how hard or how easy a character has it against "x" character.
Click to expand...
Well I think what I said is what Mike Ross is trying to say. In a matchup, you either have a chance to you don't. And as long as you have a chance, you should treat it like it's a 5-5 in your head not be like: "Oh, this MU is 3-7 I guess I'm done".
 
Last edited:
AK Stormthegates

AK Stormthegates

WOOLAY!!!!
Well if you think about it what is the difference between a heavily disadvantageous matchup and a unwinnable matchup? Really just noise at that point. If you are suffering in answers in a situations its going to be difficult regardless. Of course there is no such thing as a unwinnable matchup in modern times, but there are matchups where your opponent can just simply autopilot to win while the other has to work their ass off.

I have followed this philosophy since I started competitive gaming. If you have the advantage you should win if you play well otherwise its up in the air or you will lose unless they fuck up. Thats how i think at least.
 
Skkra

Skkra

PSN: Skkra
Vulcan Hades said:
Well I think what I said is what Mike Ross is trying to say. In a matchup, you either have a chance to you don't. And as long as you have a chance, you should treat it like it's a 5-5 in your head not be like: "Oh, tis MU is 3-7 I guess I'm done".
Click to expand...
I absolutely agree with that. While I think certain matchups are tougher than others, honestly, I don't give a shit.

Maybe when I younger I cared more, but having been playing competitively for over a decade, I'm way fucking over it. Which is why it constantly cracks me up how much time everyone wastes around here arguing matchup numbers. Does it really matter? Stop worrying about the numbers, learn the damn matchup, grind it out, and win because you're a smarter player.
 
Vulcan Hades

Vulcan Hades

Champion
Vagrant said:
Completely disagree. A matchup should never even be given a number if EITHER player hasn't done their homework on it.
Click to expand...
But then we'd never have any matchup chart because even top players don't do their homework on more than half the cast.

It takes people 3-4 years to even acknowledge that a character is not that shit after all. And even today we still see top players like Ricky Ortiz not knowing what to do vs Oni gimmicks or an entire team being humiliated by a Dee Jay. Hell not that long ago even Daigo thought Seth was a trash/joke character until Pongkoo made him eat his words at EVO.

Matchup charts should be based on equal skill and tool comparison on paper. It should not consider matchup grinding because that differs too much from player to player. Tom Brady might have a much easier time vs Grundy than Theo because he plays Aquaman differently etc.
 
Last edited:
Vagrant

Vagrant

Champion
Vulcan Hades said:
But then we'd never have any matchup chart because even top players don't do their homework on more than half the cast..
Click to expand...
You are largely correct. With a few exceptions to certain players in certain games.

This is why it's so frustrating to see people making matchup charts all the time. Few are qualified to do so.

MU charts used to actually mean something. They're basically just fancy looking excuses now.
 
Juggs

Juggs

Lose without excuses
Lead Moderator
MU #'s don't take into account player skill. It deals strictly with the tools the characters have. That's why 0-10 MU's aren't unwinnable, they're just unwinnable on paper.
 
S

Sami

Warrior
Gurpwnder said:
This begs the question: If a character is believed to have a clear-cut advantage over the opponent in a matchup, why should that character ever lose to the opponent?
Click to expand...
Because having a clear-cut advantage in certain areas doesn't mean you are able to keep that advantage at all times. Once you lose that advantage it comes down to how quickly you can regain it. Classic example is keep-away vs rushdown. You could have a character that is absolutely amazing at making it life hell for a character to get in at almost zero risk to the keep-away player, putting the MU heavily in their favour. However, should someone actually manage it (patience, reads, reactions, yolo) the next part comes down to how easily they can regain the distance. Kenshi is an example of someone who excelled at both - made it a nightmare for people to get in and could get them away with one braindead move (and a bar of meter, not exactly difficult to build unless you blew it as the opponent advanced).

Another example is the good old Evo Grand Finals of Kabal vs Cyrax. Kabal can run away all day but when Cyrax manages to catch-him the pay-off can be absolutely HUGE due to the silly damage on Cyrax. If you don't get in, you lose. Get in and hope you have some meter ready and you can work on that come-back (also lets face it DJT was on fire that day).
 
Kevlang

Kevlang

Noob
I understand what Mike Ross is trying to say, but we're talking about a competition with human opponents, rather than computers stepping through logical sequences.

I look the numbers system as sports betting, over/under, point spreads... The favored team is favored by a certain number of points. That doesn't always translate into a win at the end of the game.

Using the numbers 6-4, or 7-3, in my opinion, are used to describe how large of an advantage one character has over another. Is it a slight advantage, or a large advantage.
 
Last edited:
F

Fred Marvel

It's actually Freddy Marvel
why are we taking matchup advice from Mike "4th Place" Ross :p
excellent adventures is funny as shit tho
 
AK L0rdoftheFLY

AK L0rdoftheFLY

I hatelove this game
I thought about this once like this...

If two super computers that knew everything about injustice where playing and never made mistakes or bad reads, the character with the advantage would always win. Things like baits, conditioning, and Unobvious 50/50s would not open up people.

The characters with with the disadvantage win in tournament because their players force their opponents into making mistakes. This wouldn't happen in the above scenario.

I for one don't have a problem believing this logic. Using this, the tier system makes much more sense. Based on tools and tourney results...not MU numbers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.