He definitely did / did not pull a Wirtual.

@@l.s.11 No no, pulling a wirtual definitely does not mean to be kind to the opponents and intentionally throw away your position

King of kind throws

Go fast and risk everything 🫡

I initially thought you were talking about rounds, because after 3-4 rounds he won straight 6. But ending the video and then I realise you were talking bout ranks lol

which one lmao

that part where he kept crashing is scuffed AF too

Masa didn’t break Lars’ ankles, masa goddamn steamrolled their whole bloodline

"I'm about to end this man's whole career" 💀💀

Don't be too sad, David. Your 1-day times (and all times from all players) will be better than my nonexistent 3-month times.

F

that is hilarious lol

Granady be like "Why do i hear boss music?"

💀

I’m new want is tmgl

@@albatrossmania3219 trackmania grand league (official nadeo hosted pro player tournament), but it was recently renamed to trackmania world tour so you might also see people calling it tmwt

@@albatrossmania3219 trackmania esports, its pretty cool

How ?

@@fir7102 it's a fair format, it's not team based so no one can get carried or sandbagged. All players play drive at the same time, bunch of stuff.

I’m disappointed all the time bro

Except when he does but that's pulling a Wirtual... which is different...

Why this uaeless comments get so many likes

@@pyro3215 "hey look at me I'm a fucking asshole"

@@pyro3215 cause people liked it?

I think what you have is a relatively fair argument. but you aren't considering all the other factors, 1: Nobody is good at these maps, they released 24 hours priors and when there are 25 maps to learn, so they really don't have any time to learn all of the maps so basically nobody is good at these maps. 2: Some people are just better at some maps than others, or better at styles than others. There's nothing you can do about it. 3; They all had the same amount of time to learn the maps and if they choose to focus on 1 map and not others, that's part of the strategy or its their fault if they didn't study all the maps. It was stated that Elconn was driving WR pace on the last map despite not having a good time on the board. So, it really goes to show that Elcon just didn't practice the map very much beforehand but was very capable of winning and just didn't. There will always be some kind of RNG that favors a person in this, but in this particular final, I didn't see where that made a difference.

@@BuckleysPants I completely get what you're saying, and while people didn't have much time to practice it still has to be considered that these are some of the best players in the world with styles that match their play more than others (Elconn with dirt for example), so while they haven't had the time for specific maps, their experience on map types overall is an advantage in these scenarios. But that advantage aside, I think the biggest factor especially for a spectator event such as this, is that it's just more interesting to see multiple different maps. It gets a bit boring a repetitive to watch the same map over and over in a row with the same people in the top spots of that map (case in point is Granady and Mas dominating map 1, then Elcon dominating map 2, so for the first half of the video all we've seen is 3 people dominating maps). From a spectator perspective I just feel that having more map variety would increase the appeal of an event like this, but obviously you then have map swaps and warm ups etc to contend with and that creates a bit of chaos that could also cause problems understandably.

@@Providenza yea its some good points, id assume it would be better for any future events, hopefully anyway

I would prefer setting the Finalist threshold higher over reducing the runs per map. Four runs feels right to me as a way of making sure consistency is a winning factor. More would be boring, less would give less consistent players more of a chance, which I don't want. Fascinating topic in any case!

Hey! Kem, aka the guy who runs these events in the background, here. I fully acknowledge and agree with your remark here, during the final I also was quite a bit worried that someone will snowball on a couple of good maps in a row and will end up sweeping the whole match. Luckily (I guess?), that did not happen and in the end we saw a few clutch rounds on map 24 that decided it all. Personally I would also like to either extend the point limit or even add more maps into the mix so there is more variety in the matches, but we are already running into a pretty hard time constraint (have to fit the whole event into more or less 3 hours, this one took 3.5 hours with some delays, if I recall correctly). In the end, it's a very careful balance of many parameters (what maps to use and when, what should be the game mode settings, how many rounds, how many players advance to the next round, etc.), that we have to fine-tune - my aim, as the competition host, is to maximize the amount of players that get to participate and the amount of maps that get played (ideally all 25, but it was 20 this time), Wirtual's is to maximize the amount of interesting matches (content) without dragging it out to much, these do not necessarily align. I do not think that reducing the number of rounds per map to 3 will improve the situation by much - it will still favor the players that can adapt to the map the fastest, and now the slow-learners won't even have the ability to answer in later rounds. Not to mention that it increases the downtime ratio - 1 warmup to 3 normal rounds is 25% of downtime for the viewers, no bueno. All in all, yes, I'm aware of the problem and I have an idea how to tackle it next time, but there's still a lot to consider before blindly making changes. Hopefully you understand that :)