Lurker > MetalmindStats

FinalFantasyVll posted...

Bro. I've actually been quite calm about it the whole contest. How many topics have you seen my bragging about being right? Even Zelda>Snake which is seriously my favorite match ever cause fuck Snake..., nope, didn't happen.

Not topics (a word I didn't use, you might note), but certainly plenty of posts.

FinalFantasyVll posted...

I said that Day Zelda is #2. The clear #2. And she is. (Unless somehow Cloud is stronger, which... I can't imagine he is)

If true (and it's hard to say for sure given all the weirdness we've seen so far), this reflects really well on Snake...!

FinalFantasyVll posted...

Did you call Seph NN #9 even before we got to the Legends Bracket?

I'm actually less confident that Sephiroth is the bottom rung of the Noble Nine than I was before the Legends bracket began. I may or may not have ever posted as much, but I sure didn't try to boast and shove it up other peoples' faces all over the place, desperately, as if nothing else in my life was going right. Your antics are about as hilarious as pretending that radioactive waste would give Sonic the fight of his life.

MWC gon' MWC.

Yuri_LowelI posted...

Also if Mario does in fact lose this can we nominate him for Turd of the contest??

no

Personally, I have a hard time buying Crono or Mega Man reaching 57% on Sonic or barely losing to Zelda.

haloiscoolisbak posted...

XIII_rocks posted...

Alright yeah this is over.

Fuck you so much, Mario. Fuck you so fucking much.

Mate he cost you 8 points

He cost me 32

XIII would have a good shot at winning the whole contest if Mario clutched here (especially if he then went on to beat Zelda in the salty runback, which would equate to 16 lost points here).

FinalFantasyVll posted...

IndonesianBanjo posted...

FinalFantasyVll posted...

Mario is the worst non Blizzard non MGS cheater in contest history.

what about Tidus and Guybrush Threepwood?

I must have fallen asleep a match or three the last 16 years....

What?

Isn't Tidus like the anti clutch?

Tidus didn't win, but he stuffed against MissingNo. in 2013 at a 2-1 rate.

Mac Arrowny posted...

Yeah, that's a little high...

I don't think so, unless you want to say Link didn't SFF Pikachu at all, which I don't buy whatsoever.

There's a gold mine over in Stats tonight!









(Sorry Nanis and BT, but those screenshots were too funny not to archive.)

Paratroopa1 posted...

doesn't seem like it's 2 saves/safe

That change will be happening next round.

Link with 66.65%

I must say that I have an incredibly hard time buying 2013 Mario being barely stronger than 2010 Bowser, which is what it would have taken for Cloud to win there.

Calintares posted...

it feels sad that Cloud never was able to get his revenge against Mario for that 2002 match, and now it's probably too late.

he would've done it in any other contest.

Another person conveniently forgetting about how weak Cloud was in 2013, I see...!

'oh'

Lucina
Merida

Leia Organa
Vanellope von Schweetz

Bowser

EVE
Violet Parr

update plz

XIII_rocks posted...

Was that really so crazy given what Pokemon would go on to do 2 years later?

Well, we lacked the benefit of hindsight in 2011. At the time, Red's last contest result had been barely beating Ocelot, then not remotely threatening Mega Man X. Blue didn't even make the 2010 field. Meanwhile, Cloud and Seph still looked like high-level Noble Niners in 2010.

There's a couple other things I wanted to touch on, another 15 minutes in from my last post. One minor thing is that Pokmon haven't won the registered vote in all their matches - I know Bowser fared something like 1.3% better with GameFAQs users than anons against Charizard.

My final point is a pretty radical proposal I have about Bowser > Kirby: there was no meaningful hierarchy whatsoever in that result, and 46% is what Kirby can be expected to put up against a neutral character of Bowser's strength. To start with, I do agree with Yo that the differing pictures in their match compared to the 2005 version caused a significant swing, but I don't think the correct way to look at it is saying that Kirby underperformed due to a neutral picture compared to Bowser. Instead, I would argue that Kirby's 2005 picture fostered an underdog effect, causing a significant overperformance compared to what he should have gotten on 2005 Bowser (and I know that I said before that their match reflected both their 2005 strengths, but I was wrong). Just looking at that picture, you see both Kirby (with Popo's parka) and the Dream Land background seemingly straight from Melee, while Bowser has a totally different art style, looking like a big boss for the little underdog Kirby to beat. Meanwhile, Kirby's seen breathing ice out at Bowser's fire, which plays into the underdog perception by way of the stereotype of fire having the upper hand over ice. Combined with how a mostly-teenaged GameFAQs arguably perceived Kirby as an inherently funny, practically joke character, the stage was set for a huge overperformance.

As for why that 2005 result isn't what Kirby 'should' have gotten, his notable result beforehand was 58% on Tidus. That was good at the time, but for comparison's sake, the super-strong Bowser of 2005 got a legitimately Noble Nine-level 59% on Ryu (back when Ryu was an actual near-elite), which translates to about 65% on Rikku given Ryu's previous match against her. As Rikku has since proven with such results as 42% on Kirby himself in 2010, she's nearly on par with Tidus, but not if you take 2005 at face value. Similarly, Ryu being just 1% ahead of Tidus doesn't pass the eye test given later contests. Furthermore, since Kirby was just a generic midcarder in 2004, you're asking for him to get an even bigger Nintendo boost (in proportionate terms) than the likes of Mario. If Kirby had really boosted so much as to legitimately get 48% on turbo-Bowser, he would have likely beaten Luigi just a year later, but he instead fell short with only 47%.

In my opinion, Kirby falling off this contest is perfectly reasonable, too. Quite simply, if Fox and Captain Falcon, other characters whose appeal comes disproportionately from Smash and character design, didn't look good, why should Kirby have defied that trend? It's also worth noting that Kirby has always been somewhat of a multi-way leech - in 2010, he scored 45% on an off-looking Sonic (incidentally, about what he'd be currently expected to get on a similarly off-looking Sonic if you take his Bowser match at face value) and in 2013, he required a huge sore thumb / LFF advantage and a vigorous 4chan rally just to beat Big Boss with Sephiroth in the match. Plus, King Dedede beat expectations, but still looked weaker than Meta Knight circa 2007-2010. Because of all that, I'm now convinced that the only wonkiness in Kirby's path was SFF against Phoenix Wright.

Link
-

Vespa
Rosalina

update plz

Cloud Strife with 54.55%
Mario with 50.01%

States of the U.S.

MAX on a two-match parlay on Mega Man and Samus Aran. If Solid Snake (somehow) wins, MAX on a two-match parlay on Mega Man and Solid Snake. If Crono wins instead of Mega Man, MAX on a single-match bet on Samus Aran (or Solid Snake if he wins).

Also, shouldn't the over/under on Mario's -2 be 51% for him?

update plz