Why I hate comparing players

It’s an often discussed topic in the smash community, and it’s not hard to see why. When players represent their crew, state, and region, the out come of a match means a lot more than advancing in the bracket. If an east coast player is better than a west coast player, everyone on the east coast feels just a little more confident in their game. However, when players discuss who is better on speculation and pseudo-facts, or making ignorant you tube comments, it becomes too much for me to handle.

First off, I want to say that I am not against the idea of comparing players, quite the contrary. I think it is healthy for the community because it promotes more active dedication to Smash as a whole. When players are involved with Smash, whether it be playing the game, running tournaments, recording matches, or just posting about it on smash boards, the community grows. So when players are involved in a discussion about the comparison between two players, that’s great. The only problem is that I would like to see a more articulate discussion and less emotion involved.

The classic example of failed logic is as follows:
X player beat Y player
Y player beat Z player
Therefore, X player will beat Z player.
It would be nice if the world worked this way, but it doesn’t. It simply doesn’t. There are too many factors that go into a match that make that match unique. For once I’d like to see people discuss how one players strengths in ledge guarding will lead them to victory because their opponent doesn’t have as much experience in that area as the other. What about the mental barriers that each player faces, will those affect the match? Will the pressure of fighting a big name player be too much for the challenger to handle? Or, will the favorite to win be too cocky against the up and comer to take him seriously, only to be blindsided to a first game lost, then counter picked on game 3 to lose the set?

None of this even address that we don’t have a concrete method to determine what makes a player directly better than another. The most obvious answer is that he beats the other player more than he loses to them, but at what point can we conclude the evidence is sufficient? A simple 2 out of 3 tournament set? 5 friendlies? A $5 money match? Sure, when two players meet up in a tournament, I will reflect on their previous match ups as a clue to who might win. But if you care to tell me your opinion, be careful how you do so, it’s easy to sound ignorant or biased.

This is where my biggest complaint lays in comparing players. More often than not, comparing players is an issue of pride for one’s region. That is why I find it refreshing to meet someone who favors a player that is not from their region to win against someone that is. It tells me that they are looking at the match up objectively, and not a biased one that is based on friendship or local pride. If you want to support your local players, please do. Cheer for them, hype them up, talk shit for them, but don’t expect to be taken seriously with your one liner you tube comments, you’re only a head count for their number of fans.