Crazyirishman wrote: Fruitcake wrote: Bruceswar wrote:
Fruitcake wrote:I am sure Gen.LeeGettinhed would be careful in picking out his partner. Perhaps this is the reason there has been no answer?
I am happy to wait to prove that maybe he isn't as bad as many would have us all believe.
So what happens if me and glg win? Then what? Will you all of sudden respect him? Will he be a good player all of a sudden? How does that work? Just asking. I think this would be a damn good battle.
I will certainly respect him for beating me, to do otherwise would be asinine. Whether he becomes a good player all of a sudden, as you put it, would not be for me to judge. I can only imagine that in doing so, it will achieve:
a) Show the community that he is able to step outside his comfort zone and hold his own against other senior ranks (something, dare I say, that Blitz would always do when he was of a mind...and I always had respect for him on that and plainly stated it previously in the forum)
b) help disabuse the notion that deep down he is a one trick pony that has used/manipulated the (flawed) system to advantage himself.
It bring ups the age old question that always seems to come up now in the age of conqbashing. "Is a player who manipulates the system, (which you have to do now to be conquerer) really a good player. I've always been one to believe that anyone who tops the scoreboard is able of maintaining a rank of at least mid-major/colonel without any forms of point manipulation, which I consider to be a good player, but other may not by others standards
I would disagree on some levels with this.
yes, it does require some specialisation to top the leaderboard. But...and i can't believe I find myself writing this....if you look at Blitz's record BEFORE he went to the dark side, he really was one of the truer more honest conquerors. His game plan was simple. Spend the points learning each and every map as it came out, take the hit on those points,then start beating all and sundry up in winning on that map and get those spent points back. take a look at his record, his map experience is really very very good.
What the community wanted and still want, is an honest player, one who does not duck challenges, one who is able to, at the very least, play on more maps than most and one who can play singles, doubles, triples and quads. This is an all rounder.
All I am asking the incumbent conqueror is to play 10 games. What's he got to lose? if he was to lose the lot he would be no worse off in terms of reputation and would likely still be conqueror. As soon as he starts winning some of the 10 games, this reduces the above risk. Should he win 5 out of the 10 he can say, hand on heart, I can mix it when a Brig and a General take me on. Should he win more than 5 then he has an argument to say his position is real and true, in other words, he should be conqueror.
Stop taking it all so seriously, none of us get out alive anyway