What constitutes a “top player”?

Discussion in 'Fighting Philosophy' started by Juggs, Nov 30, 2017.


    EMPEROR_KNICKS Master of Kombat(frauds)

    I talked to some people about it, it all depends on ur definition. If you think that a person needs to place consistently to be a top player and make top 8 at majors in order to be considered one, then thats fair. If you think that its a person who can beat a top player on any given day and they do well when they go offline. Ive talked to some people and generally the first one is the one people tend to go with.
    Juggs likes this.
  2. dribirut

    dribirut BLAK FELOW

    Completely different from what it was 3-5 years ago. Too many good players now:
    All the following players are great:
    Tekken master
    Forever king
    Han rashid
    Coach Steve

    That's 40 right there and I'm sure I'm missing a shitload of other great players
    EMPEROR_KNICKS likes this.
  3. Ragnarök Tyr

    Ragnarök Tyr Premium Supporter
    Premium Supporter

    Personally I'd say anyone who can consistently make Top 16 & higher could make a case for themselves.
    Roy Arkon likes this.
  4. Tokiwartoothxdk

    Tokiwartoothxdk 『T R I G G E R E D』

  5. CrimsonShadow

    CrimsonShadow Administrator and Community Engineer

    If your local has 30 guys who are placing Top 8 at majors, then your local is basically a major.. So you may as well just say you're still placing Top 8 at a major.

    There's never been a local like this though -- where you had to beat all Top 8 players in order to make Top 8. So probably not so realistic of a situation as to be useful here.

    Also you have to be careful about subjective criteria. What makes you, for example, put REO alongsie people like Dragon and Theo in a list for Injustice 2? (Obviously meaning no disrespect to REO, as he's talented and has proven that in 3-4 different games now). You have to take care not to play favorites, even with regard to players that we know were good in previous games.

    'Top player' can't be based on potential, subjective evaluation of talent, past games, locals, Twitter hype, or anything else. Results are really what matters at the end of the day.
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2018
    Marinjuana, x TeeJay o and Roy Arkon like this.
  6. CrimsonShadow

    CrimsonShadow Administrator and Community Engineer

    Traditionally EVO is given more weight than a typical major. But it's a temporary status grant. Meaning that winning EVO would catapult you into being a top player -- but if you get bodied at every major afterward, you don't keep that status indefinitely just because you won EVO.

    The EVO bump might last a few months, but after that you've got to prove yourself again if you still want to be considered top.
    Roy Arkon and Juggs like this.
  7. Flamelurkr

    Flamelurkr Noob

    Down this weekend?
  8. Roy Arkon

    Roy Arkon Noob

    Both @Ragnarök Tyr and @CrimsonShadow were on point here. I think it's safe to say that as long as you make it to at least Top 16 or higher consistently then you're a Top player. Of course if you don't make it once, but then you manage to make it there again, you're still a Top player. One miss doesn't take you off the Top.
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2018
    Ragnarök Tyr likes this.
  9. Gotta work the weekend. Maybe in the afternoon, if I get off. I'm off today on Friday. You see me online, just holla. ;)
    Flamelurkr likes this.
  10. GLoRToR

    GLoRToR The ire of the Starf!

    Differs by community.
    In some games' communities it's not just placement, it's contribution as well, from tech to helping others get better at the game. I'd like to see more of that in our community too.

    Here it's placement and the other top players / commentators saying so, mostly.
  11. IrishMantis

    IrishMantis Most humble shit talker ever!!!
    Premium Supporter

    Rather than define what is a top player you need to look at where the threshold is for "Top" placing top 8 a mlone as you say is maybe not enough since everybody travels to the same tourneys but at the same time you don't want to release the threshold too low as top to me represents the cream of the crop. These are THE guys to beat and any can take a tournament.

    Consistent top 8 players probably is a good indicator or if a tourneys much more prestigage or Stacked it's fair to lower the threshold.

    Look at this way usually when nobody denies somebody is a top player is usually a good indicator to say said person is definitely a top player as silly as that sounds,

    I used to linger on this back in the day on how can I get people to call me a top player, now I don't give a fuck and will just Mop them in anyway
  12. Juggs

    Juggs Lose without excuses
    Lead Moderator

    Obviously there’s not really a right answer, it’s subjective. But it seems like there’s mainly two definitions/criteria.

    - A player who can compete with anyone at any time. (Someone who can beat any pro player ((SonicFox, Dragon, Theo, Foxy)) because they’re good enough to do so)

    - A player who makes top 8’s at majors consistently

    The only issue I have is with the term “consistently”. What does this mean in this context? Everh major they attend? If that’s the case, what if they only attend 1-2 majors? Is it a certain number of majors? If so, how many majors does a player have to get top 8 in? And if the number is 4 for example, what if a player has traveled to 15 majors and only made top 8 4 times? Are they still considered a top player??
    EMPEROR_KNICKS likes this.
  13. This.
    ismael4790 and Juggs like this.
  14. Marinjuana

    Marinjuana Up rock incoming, ETA 5 minutes

    Just because it's subjective doesn't mean you can't viciously argue about it! It's like arguing Lebron or Jordan is the best, except in a case where's there's arguments for both sides. :DOGE
  15. Roy Arkon

    Roy Arkon Noob

    About the consistency question, as I've said, I believe that you need to make it to at least Top 16. Top 8 is a bit too harsh to be the minimum. So in that it means that you need to make it to Top 16 at least at almost every event you, if you miss one event or don't make it to Top 16 once in while, you don't lose your status as a Top player. Consistency, at least in my book, replies to keep the goal at least 80% of the time. 100% of the time is once again, too harsh.

    This is just my 2 cents on the matter.
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2018
    Juggs likes this.
  16. CrimsonShadow

    CrimsonShadow Administrator and Community Engineer

    Consistently just makes they have a good chance to make it at each major they attend.

    If someone is making Top 8 at 50% of the majors they attend, I don't think you'd have an argument against it.

    If someone makes Top 8 and then gets bodied for 5 majors in a row, it's not quite a convincing statement for them being a top player.
    Roy Arkon and Juggs like this.
  17. Belial

    Belial Noob

    Just as "top tier character" this is mostly subjective
    Top player is defined by two things
    1) Criteria of "top" of person passing judjement
    2) Players ability to fit this criteria

    Just as with characters people usually consider "top player" someone who is often represented at top X in tournaments. X, by a consensus, being 8.

    Just as with characters higher placings improve your position as "top" and lower placings diminish it. Placing top 3 is better than placing top 8. thus if criteria for "top player" is percieved by someone as ability to place in top3 of a major (or a MAJOR major) his evaluation of top player will shift.

    Another option is being accepted by other "top players" (experts) as a top player, despite not placing in tournaments, as expert opinion generally hold a lot of value to commoners.

    TL:DR: there is no true formula of "player skill". "Top player" is usually defined by ability to place top 3-top8 at majors, but can vary still.
    Juggs likes this.
  18. Juggs

    Juggs Lose without excuses
    Lead Moderator

    Bump. Tried to link this thread on twitter to Slayer, but it wouldn’t work for some reason.

Share This Page