A comparison..... Who's really the best and how to prove it
Posted: Fri Dec 31, 2021 2:21 pmI see a lot of people think The Last Droid is one of the best. Let's take a closer look. He's played some variation of ATG over 2000 times. How could he not be better than just about everyone with that much experience?
But what happens when he plays a set that he hasn't played 2000 times more than you?
Let's look at his record in one of the subsets, ATG8 POST WAR (it's still ATG, it's just a smaller subset).
Droid has played 12 ATG8 POST WAR teams. He has had a respectable 5 playoff teams and 2 championships and a .524 winning percentage. With a post season winning percentage of .534.
I have played ATG8 POST WAR 11 times, I have 6 playoff teams and 4 championships ( more than double in less seasons). I have a .552 winning percentage ( same as my lifetime winning percentage basically .553) and a playoff winning percentage of .638.
Now I can already hear all my whining haters say, well if you are the best why don't you prove it with the ATG9 Tournament.
Reason number one, ATG9 is the worst game SOM offers for a myriad of reasons. Not the least of which is, you have no control over your bullpen and there's only one strategy that literally everyone uses... Also there's the bit about him playing it 2000 times more than anyone else.
Also, why should I have to prove ( again) that I am better than him, with his set and his rules. Especially when I have already done this several times. I have won at least two championships with Droid in the same league.
So I propose a way to have another competition to prove who is best that would be fair for all.
The 1998 set is brand new. I have never played it. So let's get 12 managers with winning percentages that are .540 or better, and who have won championships in at least 20% of the leagues they have played in and see who is really the best, when the tables are even and one manager doesn't have a 2000 team head start?
I won't hold my breath, but if anyone wants to prove they are the best, here's your chance.
1. Radagast Brown .553 / 44 championships out of 208
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
But what happens when he plays a set that he hasn't played 2000 times more than you?
Let's look at his record in one of the subsets, ATG8 POST WAR (it's still ATG, it's just a smaller subset).
Droid has played 12 ATG8 POST WAR teams. He has had a respectable 5 playoff teams and 2 championships and a .524 winning percentage. With a post season winning percentage of .534.
I have played ATG8 POST WAR 11 times, I have 6 playoff teams and 4 championships ( more than double in less seasons). I have a .552 winning percentage ( same as my lifetime winning percentage basically .553) and a playoff winning percentage of .638.
Now I can already hear all my whining haters say, well if you are the best why don't you prove it with the ATG9 Tournament.
Reason number one, ATG9 is the worst game SOM offers for a myriad of reasons. Not the least of which is, you have no control over your bullpen and there's only one strategy that literally everyone uses... Also there's the bit about him playing it 2000 times more than anyone else.
Also, why should I have to prove ( again) that I am better than him, with his set and his rules. Especially when I have already done this several times. I have won at least two championships with Droid in the same league.
So I propose a way to have another competition to prove who is best that would be fair for all.
The 1998 set is brand new. I have never played it. So let's get 12 managers with winning percentages that are .540 or better, and who have won championships in at least 20% of the leagues they have played in and see who is really the best, when the tables are even and one manager doesn't have a 2000 team head start?
I won't hold my breath, but if anyone wants to prove they are the best, here's your chance.
1. Radagast Brown .553 / 44 championships out of 208
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
