Do basics win?


Ok, so this might seem like an obvious question… BUT… I’ve seen plenty of times where a player is in a bad situation, (eg. an Akuma player vs. a Makoto, or a ST Gief vs. ST Dhalsim, etc), and they make a win…

Now, counting luck out of the equation, what is more important to help a player win in a situation like this? I play Akuma, so when I play a Makoto player, I make sure that I play my A Game, whereas if I play against a Hugo, I’m a bit more relaxed. Does it come down to, which player has the basics down (eg. parry, blocking, dashing, footsies, hi-lo mixups, etc), or do you think there’s something else to it?

Basically, my question ends up being…

Are mastery of the basics what seperates a decent player from a good player? I’ve noticed that most decent marvel players can’t do shit with low tiers, because they can’t block, but if you get somebody like Sanford or Yipes, and they run low tiers, they’re amazing, because they can still block, and they understand team dynamics, and how assists work.


They can in my opinion.

The Basics is what every player has when doing anything competeive. Mastering Basics can be advantageous even during the highest level of play. Players with the most solid understanding for the basics can usually survive against the most advance skill levels and tactics.

I guess another question would be where to draw the line between what is basic and what is advanced.


As far as “basics” go, I think that anything in the instruction manual (exaggeration) would be basic. There are advanced blocking techniques and such, but for the most part, blocking is part of the basics of the game, whereas avoiding and dodging are more advanced, since you must read your opponent on a completely different level to avoid all attacks they can possibly do. Knowing that Akuma’s s.hp is probably his longest reaching attack, and blocking high at a certain distance because you know that’s all he can do that you can’t telegraph isn’t as advanced as knowing exactly how far to stay away that you can counter poke that s.hp.

Parrying for the most part, I think is basic, wheras red-parrying and such is advanced. Just because Daigo parried all of Chun’s SA2, doesn’t mean that he didn’t use a fundamental aspect of the game. Knowing to jump and how to take off the exact amount of life that Chun had left is the advanced part of that. I don’t think that match would have been nearly as spectacular if Daigo didn’t come back with the 50% comeback. I think as an overall, the basics come in with any attack that you can do without having to think about it, where an advance tactic takes much more analysis, and quick analysis I might add.

Finding the line to an exact point is like trying to determine when a pile of rocks becomes a heap of rocks. I BELIEVE it’s actually, in Philosophy, called the Fallacy of the Heap, but I could be mistaken.


The part that most people find fantastic is that

a) he did all that
b) he air parried last hit- knowing it was only way he could finish him off- cause of the extra damage from a jump in.


I would like to think that the basics of a fighting game would be knowing and understanding the controls of a game, knowing every character and there move lists. Then it’s up to the skill level of the player to figure out how to put those basics together and use them to win.

I agree that knowing how to punish a move and stuff like frame data and strategic hand and button movements would qualify as advanced tactics. Any information that isn’t provided up front by the game itself would qualify as advance in my opinion. These would qualify as things that would help advance your basic strategy.

…but for some reason these theories still fail to draw a solid line at what would be considered basic.

Think of it this way. Basics of Super Street Fighter 2: Turbo would include knowing and understanding all basic game controls and characters and thier respective move lists by my theory, But when playing Street Fighter 3: Third Strike, all the same basics will aply, but the with the addition of more moves and more controls i.e. parrying for example. Can a player using basic strategies from Super Street Fighter 2: Turbo win a Third Strike match withough knowing or understanding Parrying, Throwing, and Super Jumping even though the basics of the older game are still part of the new game? Do we just rule the games as two completely different games and the player must start from scratch to understand the basics of the new game?

How would we explain the losses, a player that would be seen as a solid 3S player, suffers when playing ST?

Where do we draw the line?


I think, as you said, that a player cannot inquire everything they’ve learned from one game to another. They still must adapt to the new game, HOWEVER, things like mind games, hi-low mixups can still apply when dealing with a player, because humans still tend to react a certain way.


Given every detail we discussed, I would agree that learning the basics of whatever game at hand would make winning possible, but the need to learn and evolve ones tactics will undoubfully surfice.


well that pretty much all a fighting game is basic moves techniques used at a high pace movement mastering those is the key to being a winner


Actually, he could have avoided the last hit of Chun’s super and still jumped in the air. I don’t actually play THird Strike, but I’ve seen MOV parry Chun’s super into jump in combo, with the last hit whiffing.


The last hit whiffing!?

I havn’t played in a while but let me think.

Taking what you said litterally, it would sound possible if the the player parried every hit and for the last kick of chuns super the player Super Jumped straight up, making the kick whiff and then followed up with a jump in combo of choice, but I would like to think that the window to land a big combo would be alot smaller than it would be if the last kick was parried mid air.

To combo off of a stright up Jump-in round house from Ken, the kick has to land pretty deep, in order to enable you to land with enough hit stun left on your opponent to initiate a follow up combo.

Whiffing the hit would shorten that window too much wouldn’t it?

P.S. I can’t beleave that after all these years, this match vid is still in discussion. wow


It was done here, last match:

no linking to fucking sbo videos next person will be banned -BACARDI

In any case, this isn’t that relevant to the discussion. As stated, defining what is basic and what isn’t, may be difficult. Also, are you referring to basics within the system, or basics such as how to play intelligently. Both are important, the latter probably moreso (unless you completely know nothing about the system).


Vid’s not working for me for some reason, but either way, I’d rather stay on topic.

Mix-up’s mind games, playing smart or intellegently are all factors that the game itself doesn’t offer. The players has to achieve and harness these abilites. A highly intellegent player that has only basic knowledge of a game should have a very good chance at beating a inexperienced player who learded all the advanced tricks by reading an FAQ or watching video. I would also believe that if an advanced player and a player who knows only basics were both highly intellegent, the match would be more in the advanced players favor but the player using basics could still win.


High level players win because they know the basics of the game as well as all the little details that other players might overlook.


**Duck and punch, Duck and punch. Remember to hold back. xD

Fear the cheese!**


I think it’s the fact that high level players really understand basic moves. A lot of players fall victom to not really knowing how a technique actually works, they just know it’s good so they use it and hope for the best. Basics may begin with simple things like pokes or what not, but the difference is the knowledge behind that poke. Every action effects you’re opponent, so understanding how/why is key.


I think this is a good point. I know a player that almost refuses to block. He thinks parry is the answer to everything. Now, he can parry alot of stuff, but he hasn’t won any tourneys because someone plays a good mixup and shuts him down.
Blocking = Basic
Parry = Intermediate/advanced
In this case Blocking> Parry.


I think this explains it all right here, thats the reason I see the “Flashy” players loose to the vanilla players, its because the old school vanilla players have that understanding of why things work the way they do. its like the NBA, Why is Tim Duncan so good? how often does he do something that makes you go “OHHHH!”? not often, but he is always up there in the top tier of players every year, why? because he has the fundamentals of the game down pat.


Good shit.


obivously the first thing you do is start basic, once you master that, you build on the basics to become advanced.

basics win until you are forced to get better. if you can’t understand how to get better than you are missing a basic element in everygame. Seeing what you need to improve on, then doing it.


Not true. Many players don’t master the basics before they get into the advanced stuff. aka, trying to build Rome in a day.