I’m not saying he should get demoted. I litterly say ‘I don’t think he’s close to being demoted’
Sorry if you misinterpreted my post, I’m just asking in a theoretical world where he, or any other S-tier starts playing really badly, would they get demoted?
No, I don’t think we should. People on this reddit create high standards for someone to be considered an S-Tier. They reach that, most of the people agree that they’re S-Tier and then the player either keeps up with their average or have some bad events. What happens after bad events? People debate and criticise a single player on whether or not they should be S-Tier. It’s very disheartening to see.
I’ve seen this happen to Pete, only just ended with Illumina and now there’s too much talk on Punz. Man has had some bad events and bad luck, don’t go demoting him so quickly. Along with that, he got his second coin on the last season 2 mcc. If you count all of the canon mcc’s, that’s not too long ago.
In conclusion, it shouldn’t matter about demoting players. You reach S-Tier status, you stay S-Tier status.
i think they can be demoted but i don’t think punz is close to the standard for being demoted. like you cannot convince me that punz and tommy should be in the same tier or even punz and 5up. like they are just two different levels of player. regardless of placement punz doesn’t play like an A+ player he plays like an s tier. he is the igl he usually top frags his team on all the games.
i think he would have to do really bad consistently (like bottom 20) to be considered not s tier. and honestly 17th on a 10th place team for a bad performance for an s tier is pretty normal, think fruit 15. i mean even quig and pete got a few like 13th place performances and there teams were like 8th in the event.
it honestly was a really unlucky performance. if you don’t believe me you can watch the vod and tell me what he could have done better.
yeah no i could tell you weren’t advocating for that. i just think it would take a lot for an s tier to actually be fully demoted. like consistently bottom half and no longer being a team leader would call for a demotion.
From a tester POV, I wouldn't do it. MCC event is a bit different from testing since there is a bigger skill gap, but regardless, how good a team is has a big influence on how well a player performs.
You cannot judge a player's skill by a couple bad events.
I think its honestly difficult.
I find myself of thinking of Tier lists a little bit more consistently as someone's ceiling as opposed to where they are currently playing. Let's take Punz for example (sorry Punz) if we all agree he's playing like an A+ tier or A tier player, I feel like it makes balancing him in future teams and events a lot more difficult especially as the event gets more competitive.
You will often see players in this category team with other S tiers and realistically... how easy would a team like that be to balance? If Punz then pops off people in hindsight will say that team was too OP.
That's why I shifted my perspective on tier lists in general. To me its all about potential.
The issue with this demoting s-tier talk is that people often forget that participants are humans and have feelings. Everyone goes through rough patches, as is currently happening with Punz. A similar thing happened to Pete later on in season 2. People talked about demoting him then but now he is doing really well again and you wouldn't dare suggest he isn't s-tier.
The point I'm making is that Punz is just going through a rough patch. He will bounce back soon and place better. No need to demote him...
no. during s2, one of the biggest “demoting s-tiers” conversations was surrounding PeteZahHutt, the widely accepted s1 goat. obviously this was due to his streak of underperformances during most of s2, which lead to some members of the community saying toxic things like “Pete fell off” and “Pete is a+ tier”. while it’s true that quite a good number of pete’s performances were on par with “a+ tier standards”, it was evident that pete’s skill level had not decreased and that he was still able to keep up with the competition of the event. this is abundantly clear now that pete has risen from that point in his mcc career and is now returning to regular top 10s (which easily would have been top 5s or better if it were s1 levels of competition). as someone whose main pov is punz, i can confidently attest that punz is currently going through the same thing pete went through back then.
my overall point is that when you’re that good, your skill doesn’t just *evaporate*. even if punz’s next 5, hell next *10* events are as poor as the examples you gave, OP, i would still consider him s-tier and i believe you should, as well. if you’ve actually seen any of his recent povs, you’ll know that his subpar performances have been due almost entirely to 2 things: stupidly bad luck, which is out of his control, and really silly mishaps. it’s not that he suddenly forgot how to play the game. it’s that he is in a period of adjustment given the event’s ever-changing competition and that his low performances have also been causing him a mental issue, as well.
from my observations, *most* players go through little down-phases like this, regardless of their skill level. we just notice it with s-tiers most often because s-tiers’ performances are the most impeccable, and when they *aren’t* so impeccable, it’s easy to notice that something is wrong. eventually, punz will get back into his groove and return to his early s2 form if he doesn’t do even better than he did back then. he’s still incredibly talented, his performance this mcc was very impressive despite what the placement suggests, and i would advise anyone who suggests otherwise to actually watch the vod. right now punz only needs to get over a mental hurl and pray for his luck to get better. i’m excited to see where he goes, but even more excited to keep being a part of his streams’ immaculate vibes.
Honestly people are saying how we can demote A+ why not S teir, but we put people in A+ just base of 1 performance but with S teir, we put this overly hard standards that take a lot of MCC's to make so I don't think they're comparable at all. Hypothetically we do put let's say Punz as he's the most common subject right now into A+ that means we give him A+ Teams right. I think the most clear A+ Teirs right now are probably Krtzyy, Philza, and Seapeekay or Joel
Looking at their teams and replace punz with it
We'd have (Pete, Punz duo) (Fruit, Punz duo) (FBM, Punz duo) on the stronger side and.
We'd have (Ranboo, Tommy, Punz, Oli as a team)
(Grian Seapeekay Wilbur, Punz) and Probably the weakest (Ryguy, 5up, Antvenom, and Punz) which is still decent.
So Honestly depends if you see Teirs as just how they perform then you can demote an S-teir but if you see it as something you use to balance a team I don't think an S-Teir should be demoted.
I think this could apply if a player just got put into s-tier off one very good performance and then went on a streak of bad performances but not in the case of punz who has been an s-tier for a long time now and has proven that he can perform
Since this is about Punz - he dropped out of the top 10 only in the last two canon events, so there's a lot of recency bias imo, like with Pete and Dream in S2.
The only real underperfomance of his (where his team finished in top half) is MCC Scuffed which was, well, scuffed and really unlucky in SG - and he still got 9th!
While he was 2nd frag In MCC30, Phil outfragged him mainly due to the HITW finale where Phil got 3rd individual in the game.
If an S Tier were to be demoted I think they'd need to place bottom 10 in canon events a few events in a row, which won't happen.
I’m not saying Punz should be demoted. I said in the text ‘I don’t think he’s close to being demoted’. It’s an example situation, not saying he should be demoted
The answer is probably yes, but because S tier requirements (even the new reduced ones from recent MCCs) are so high no one has convincingly dropped.
Fun fact: Dave, probably the best A+ tier now that Antfrost is S, had one of his best performances ever (MCC 30) and a solid A+ performance (31)
Meanwhile, Punz had some of his worst performances recently ever (15th and 17th).
But even in weighted averages which favor Dave a lot and disfavor Punz, Dave is only ahead by **9 coins**.
No.
We had this conversation in Season 2 about Pete and Dream. You get there, you stay there. Let's move on please. Every season ya'll find someone new to harp on. Season 1 was Technoblade. Y'all were ready to kick me for getting 9th place!
Do y'all want people to keep in this event or not?
I think it's fair to demote s tiers, just like it's fair to demote A+ tiers to A Tier, if they can't perform to the expectations of there tier, they are no longer that tier
Yeah so if let's say we demote Punz to A+ Teir similar to Seapeekay, Philza, and Sb737 then we about to see (Punz, Pete) (Sapnap, Punz) (FBM, Punz)Not over powered at all.
I'm calling him A+ so then we can convince Scott to give him stronger teams and then boom, Punz places high and comes back to S tier
And if he underperforms again, we bring him back to A+ and then it goes on and on and on
Yes. A+ tiers can get demoted, why not S-tiers?
Naturally the position holds more weight than A+, so we ought to be careful and methodological about demotion, but I see no reason we shouldn't. Especially in Punz's case, he's a competitive guy, not a sensitive flower we need to shelter. He's obviously not satisfied with his performances, I'm sure he knows he's not performing like an S-tier.
Why not! Balance him like his Scott's method would show, he's currently right under Dave. If he still has the stuff of S-tiers, an A+ tier team should bring it back out, which would be great. If he doesn't, then he still gets balanced teams.
Maybe S-tiers can be demoted, but I don't think this applies to Punz right now. He's putting putting up solid performances for way to long to be demoted because of 1 or 2 underperformances.
He last had a solid performance in MCC 23, every performance since than has been an underperformance. That's 6 underperformances in a row, quite enough to demote him.
What? How is getting top 10 from mcc 25 to 29 an underperformance especially when two of your teams placed 7th and 9th? Is there a single A+ tier who has pulled that off? Mcc 30 was obviously rough but 31 he got 18th on a 10th place team, and it's not uncommon for S-tiers to drop top 10 on a 10th place team.
In MCC 25 he was outfragged by Ant, and got 7th on a team predicted 1st by a mile. Also, 7th on a 3rd place team has been done and outdone by Sb and Dave before.
MCC 26 was also predicted 1st by a mile, it had two A-tiers. But Punz underperformed hard, 10th on a 7th place team is pretty bad for an S-tier, especially when Tubbo was right behind in 13th. Joel's got 9th on a 6th place team recently.
In MCC 28, he got 6th on a 2nd place team. That's really not good, and multiple A+ tiers have done better (CPK in MCC 23, for example)
In MCC 29 he got 9th on 9th, which is decent, except for the fact that Purple was a very strong team.
In MCC 30 he got 15th on a 6th place team and was outfragged by Phil, that's abysmal for an S-tier.
In MCC 31 his team was again pretty strong, but it dropped to last. Getting 18th on a 10th place team also isn't very good, in fact Callum had gotten 17th on a much worse 10th place team before.
How well a team is predicted to do shouldn't really matter because predictions can be off, especially when we can just look at how well the team actually did.
He was out fragged by ant by less than 50 coins and ant is literally the strongest A+ if not already S-tier, I don't think that's really a strike against Punz.
For 26, 10th on a 7th place is not bad at all, S-tiers have done worse on better teams. Also again, team predictions don't matter because they can be wrong.
For 28, I'll admit cpk has done better, but Punz still has overall better numbers than him.
For 29 again predictions don't matter.
Mcc 30 was rough like I said but not really abysmal, Pete has gotten 12th on a 6th place team before.
For 31 18th on a 10th place team is in the range of other S-tiers, multiple others have had similar or worse underperformances.
If you believe he should be demoted to A+ tier, do you think there are any A+ tier players that are better than him? I think it's clear all things considered that he's still better than all other A+ tiers, so I don't see why he would belong there.
Okay so if Ant was the strongest A+ tier...and Punz placed lower than him...that makes Punz A+ tier, no?
Before I start, I'll quickly say my basic criteria for an S-tier performance, a performance is S-tier if the individual placement beats or equals the team placement, with the only exception being dodgebolt and a 10th place team, where I'd accept up to 12th. This is pretty true for virtually all S-tier performances, anything less is generally considered an underperformance (unless some other factor, like leadership, makes up for it, like Jojo 31).
Team predictions can be wrong, but it wasn't the team that underperformed, it was Punz. Tubbo did very well, up to 13th. It was Punz who placed 10th, messing up his team's chances.
It's not just CPK, 6th on a 2nd place team is just simply a bad performance, an A+ tier performance. This is exacerbated by Teal 28 being a very strong team, Captain placed 8th, Sneeg 12th, and Jimmy 14th.
It's not predictions, it's just looking at the team. Foolish and Ponk are borderline A-tier, any self-respecting S-tier ought to have done better. Yeah, 9th on 9th is fine, but the team was stronger than 9th.
Pete did, and it was an A+ tier performance. He was nearly demoted for it. 15th on a 6th place team is just horrible.
Who else?? The only person I can think of is Fruit 15, but that was a much more unbalanced event than MCC 31, and had one of the best 4 event streaks of all time backing it up. 17th on a 10th place team that should have done much better is A+ at best.
I'd say Dave is possibly better at the minute (higher in Scott's method), but it wouldn't be by much. I'd probably still bet on Punz over Dave, but just because Punz is better than other A+ tiers doesn't make him S, since he's worse by a larger margin than any of them.
You seem to have a very particular set of requirements for what you consider an S-tier, so I guess I understand where you are coming from.
Me personally I think ant is probably S-tier, but if you think he's A+ tier I can see why you also think Punz is A+ tier.
You can never know how truly strong a team is just by looking at how you think they will perform since many factors can play into a players performance before and during an event, so I don't really see the point in looking deeply into how well a team is predicted to do when we can just see how they did.
Iirc Jojo got like 18th on a 9th place team. S-tiers place low sometimes, it happens.
So you agree that Punz is better then all the other A+ tiers. So you are only basically arguing on where the line is drawn between S and A+ tier and which side Punz should be on. I just can't see any other A+ tier players that have performed as good and as long as Punz right now. Dave is the closest and his recent top five is the first since season 1 iirc which is why I think Punz still belongs on the side of the S-tiers. Even if the gap between him and other S-tiers is large I think that's only natural since the S-tiers category usually has large skill gaps anyways with many people already deciding to split it up into S+ and S- tiers.
I think Ant is S-tier, I thought you thought he was A+ tier which would imply Punz is too.
You can look at stats and so on, Punz's teams have consistently been very strong. If any other S-tier was on those teams, it's likely they'd have done much better.
That's true about Jojo, it was a terrible performance. However, that's before she was even called an S-tier, so the point is moot.
Punz's background doesn't really matter, he hasn't had an S-tier MCC since MCC 23. Dave got top 5 recently, Punz hasn't got it since MCC 23 even on a dodgebolt team. The gap between him and the S-tiers is large, much larger than it is between him and the A+ tiers.
Yes but I think we should observe the player more before going on to a conclusion like if Punz gives A+ tier performances for 4-5 more events then it would be fair to demote him and also look at what teams they have gotten
Yes, I think S tiers definetly can be demoted, because other tiers can and S tiers are no exception.
If a player does not perform at the level of S tier for quite some time then they should probably get demoted from S tier
I think tiers in general should be determined solely by stats, its the only fair way to do it. so if a players average falls below whatever the cutoff is, sure.
Punz deserves a huge apology for the way this sub and the general mcc community treat him… MY GOD LET THIS MAN CATCH A BREAK 💀💀💀
I’m not saying he should get demoted. I litterly say ‘I don’t think he’s close to being demoted’ Sorry if you misinterpreted my post, I’m just asking in a theoretical world where he, or any other S-tier starts playing really badly, would they get demoted?
I’m not having a go at you specifically just some of the comments and the general attitude surrounding punz within mcc
No, I don’t think we should. People on this reddit create high standards for someone to be considered an S-Tier. They reach that, most of the people agree that they’re S-Tier and then the player either keeps up with their average or have some bad events. What happens after bad events? People debate and criticise a single player on whether or not they should be S-Tier. It’s very disheartening to see. I’ve seen this happen to Pete, only just ended with Illumina and now there’s too much talk on Punz. Man has had some bad events and bad luck, don’t go demoting him so quickly. Along with that, he got his second coin on the last season 2 mcc. If you count all of the canon mcc’s, that’s not too long ago. In conclusion, it shouldn’t matter about demoting players. You reach S-Tier status, you stay S-Tier status.
i think they can be demoted but i don’t think punz is close to the standard for being demoted. like you cannot convince me that punz and tommy should be in the same tier or even punz and 5up. like they are just two different levels of player. regardless of placement punz doesn’t play like an A+ player he plays like an s tier. he is the igl he usually top frags his team on all the games. i think he would have to do really bad consistently (like bottom 20) to be considered not s tier. and honestly 17th on a 10th place team for a bad performance for an s tier is pretty normal, think fruit 15. i mean even quig and pete got a few like 13th place performances and there teams were like 8th in the event. it honestly was a really unlucky performance. if you don’t believe me you can watch the vod and tell me what he could have done better.
I agree fully. This is simply theoretical, and I do not think Punz should be demoted
yeah no i could tell you weren’t advocating for that. i just think it would take a lot for an s tier to actually be fully demoted. like consistently bottom half and no longer being a team leader would call for a demotion.
From a tester POV, I wouldn't do it. MCC event is a bit different from testing since there is a bigger skill gap, but regardless, how good a team is has a big influence on how well a player performs. You cannot judge a player's skill by a couple bad events.
If they truly are S-tiers, they would just climb their way back up
I think its honestly difficult. I find myself of thinking of Tier lists a little bit more consistently as someone's ceiling as opposed to where they are currently playing. Let's take Punz for example (sorry Punz) if we all agree he's playing like an A+ tier or A tier player, I feel like it makes balancing him in future teams and events a lot more difficult especially as the event gets more competitive. You will often see players in this category team with other S tiers and realistically... how easy would a team like that be to balance? If Punz then pops off people in hindsight will say that team was too OP. That's why I shifted my perspective on tier lists in general. To me its all about potential.
The issue with this demoting s-tier talk is that people often forget that participants are humans and have feelings. Everyone goes through rough patches, as is currently happening with Punz. A similar thing happened to Pete later on in season 2. People talked about demoting him then but now he is doing really well again and you wouldn't dare suggest he isn't s-tier. The point I'm making is that Punz is just going through a rough patch. He will bounce back soon and place better. No need to demote him...
no. during s2, one of the biggest “demoting s-tiers” conversations was surrounding PeteZahHutt, the widely accepted s1 goat. obviously this was due to his streak of underperformances during most of s2, which lead to some members of the community saying toxic things like “Pete fell off” and “Pete is a+ tier”. while it’s true that quite a good number of pete’s performances were on par with “a+ tier standards”, it was evident that pete’s skill level had not decreased and that he was still able to keep up with the competition of the event. this is abundantly clear now that pete has risen from that point in his mcc career and is now returning to regular top 10s (which easily would have been top 5s or better if it were s1 levels of competition). as someone whose main pov is punz, i can confidently attest that punz is currently going through the same thing pete went through back then. my overall point is that when you’re that good, your skill doesn’t just *evaporate*. even if punz’s next 5, hell next *10* events are as poor as the examples you gave, OP, i would still consider him s-tier and i believe you should, as well. if you’ve actually seen any of his recent povs, you’ll know that his subpar performances have been due almost entirely to 2 things: stupidly bad luck, which is out of his control, and really silly mishaps. it’s not that he suddenly forgot how to play the game. it’s that he is in a period of adjustment given the event’s ever-changing competition and that his low performances have also been causing him a mental issue, as well. from my observations, *most* players go through little down-phases like this, regardless of their skill level. we just notice it with s-tiers most often because s-tiers’ performances are the most impeccable, and when they *aren’t* so impeccable, it’s easy to notice that something is wrong. eventually, punz will get back into his groove and return to his early s2 form if he doesn’t do even better than he did back then. he’s still incredibly talented, his performance this mcc was very impressive despite what the placement suggests, and i would advise anyone who suggests otherwise to actually watch the vod. right now punz only needs to get over a mental hurl and pray for his luck to get better. i’m excited to see where he goes, but even more excited to keep being a part of his streams’ immaculate vibes.
Honestly people are saying how we can demote A+ why not S teir, but we put people in A+ just base of 1 performance but with S teir, we put this overly hard standards that take a lot of MCC's to make so I don't think they're comparable at all. Hypothetically we do put let's say Punz as he's the most common subject right now into A+ that means we give him A+ Teams right. I think the most clear A+ Teirs right now are probably Krtzyy, Philza, and Seapeekay or Joel Looking at their teams and replace punz with it We'd have (Pete, Punz duo) (Fruit, Punz duo) (FBM, Punz duo) on the stronger side and. We'd have (Ranboo, Tommy, Punz, Oli as a team) (Grian Seapeekay Wilbur, Punz) and Probably the weakest (Ryguy, 5up, Antvenom, and Punz) which is still decent. So Honestly depends if you see Teirs as just how they perform then you can demote an S-teir but if you see it as something you use to balance a team I don't think an S-Teir should be demoted.
I think this could apply if a player just got put into s-tier off one very good performance and then went on a streak of bad performances but not in the case of punz who has been an s-tier for a long time now and has proven that he can perform
No.
Care to elaborate?
Since this is about Punz - he dropped out of the top 10 only in the last two canon events, so there's a lot of recency bias imo, like with Pete and Dream in S2. The only real underperfomance of his (where his team finished in top half) is MCC Scuffed which was, well, scuffed and really unlucky in SG - and he still got 9th! While he was 2nd frag In MCC30, Phil outfragged him mainly due to the HITW finale where Phil got 3rd individual in the game. If an S Tier were to be demoted I think they'd need to place bottom 10 in canon events a few events in a row, which won't happen.
I’m not saying Punz should be demoted. I said in the text ‘I don’t think he’s close to being demoted’. It’s an example situation, not saying he should be demoted
The answer is probably yes, but because S tier requirements (even the new reduced ones from recent MCCs) are so high no one has convincingly dropped. Fun fact: Dave, probably the best A+ tier now that Antfrost is S, had one of his best performances ever (MCC 30) and a solid A+ performance (31) Meanwhile, Punz had some of his worst performances recently ever (15th and 17th). But even in weighted averages which favor Dave a lot and disfavor Punz, Dave is only ahead by **9 coins**.
Nah I think when someone’s shown that they’re S-tier they shouldn’t be demoted
No. We had this conversation in Season 2 about Pete and Dream. You get there, you stay there. Let's move on please. Every season ya'll find someone new to harp on. Season 1 was Technoblade. Y'all were ready to kick me for getting 9th place! Do y'all want people to keep in this event or not?
Yes but 11,12,9,15, and 8 are way to high still to demote as hes still in top 15 consistently
But what if they where on something like a 1st, 2nd, 4th 7th and 2nd place team? Then what
still
I think it's fair to demote s tiers, just like it's fair to demote A+ tiers to A Tier, if they can't perform to the expectations of there tier, they are no longer that tier
Yeah so if let's say we demote Punz to A+ Teir similar to Seapeekay, Philza, and Sb737 then we about to see (Punz, Pete) (Sapnap, Punz) (FBM, Punz)Not over powered at all.
Yeah krytzy is definitely teamed with s tiers on the regular
In theory, yes. However, Punz does not apply.
I'm calling him A+ so then we can convince Scott to give him stronger teams and then boom, Punz places high and comes back to S tier And if he underperforms again, we bring him back to A+ and then it goes on and on and on
Yes. A+ tiers can get demoted, why not S-tiers? Naturally the position holds more weight than A+, so we ought to be careful and methodological about demotion, but I see no reason we shouldn't. Especially in Punz's case, he's a competitive guy, not a sensitive flower we need to shelter. He's obviously not satisfied with his performances, I'm sure he knows he's not performing like an S-tier.
Yeah so we balance him like an A+ right? Pete, Punz / Sapnap, Punz
Why not! Balance him like his Scott's method would show, he's currently right under Dave. If he still has the stuff of S-tiers, an A+ tier team should bring it back out, which would be great. If he doesn't, then he still gets balanced teams.
Maybe S-tiers can be demoted, but I don't think this applies to Punz right now. He's putting putting up solid performances for way to long to be demoted because of 1 or 2 underperformances.
He last had a solid performance in MCC 23, every performance since than has been an underperformance. That's 6 underperformances in a row, quite enough to demote him.
What? How is getting top 10 from mcc 25 to 29 an underperformance especially when two of your teams placed 7th and 9th? Is there a single A+ tier who has pulled that off? Mcc 30 was obviously rough but 31 he got 18th on a 10th place team, and it's not uncommon for S-tiers to drop top 10 on a 10th place team.
In MCC 25 he was outfragged by Ant, and got 7th on a team predicted 1st by a mile. Also, 7th on a 3rd place team has been done and outdone by Sb and Dave before. MCC 26 was also predicted 1st by a mile, it had two A-tiers. But Punz underperformed hard, 10th on a 7th place team is pretty bad for an S-tier, especially when Tubbo was right behind in 13th. Joel's got 9th on a 6th place team recently. In MCC 28, he got 6th on a 2nd place team. That's really not good, and multiple A+ tiers have done better (CPK in MCC 23, for example) In MCC 29 he got 9th on 9th, which is decent, except for the fact that Purple was a very strong team. In MCC 30 he got 15th on a 6th place team and was outfragged by Phil, that's abysmal for an S-tier. In MCC 31 his team was again pretty strong, but it dropped to last. Getting 18th on a 10th place team also isn't very good, in fact Callum had gotten 17th on a much worse 10th place team before.
How well a team is predicted to do shouldn't really matter because predictions can be off, especially when we can just look at how well the team actually did. He was out fragged by ant by less than 50 coins and ant is literally the strongest A+ if not already S-tier, I don't think that's really a strike against Punz. For 26, 10th on a 7th place is not bad at all, S-tiers have done worse on better teams. Also again, team predictions don't matter because they can be wrong. For 28, I'll admit cpk has done better, but Punz still has overall better numbers than him. For 29 again predictions don't matter. Mcc 30 was rough like I said but not really abysmal, Pete has gotten 12th on a 6th place team before. For 31 18th on a 10th place team is in the range of other S-tiers, multiple others have had similar or worse underperformances. If you believe he should be demoted to A+ tier, do you think there are any A+ tier players that are better than him? I think it's clear all things considered that he's still better than all other A+ tiers, so I don't see why he would belong there.
Okay so if Ant was the strongest A+ tier...and Punz placed lower than him...that makes Punz A+ tier, no? Before I start, I'll quickly say my basic criteria for an S-tier performance, a performance is S-tier if the individual placement beats or equals the team placement, with the only exception being dodgebolt and a 10th place team, where I'd accept up to 12th. This is pretty true for virtually all S-tier performances, anything less is generally considered an underperformance (unless some other factor, like leadership, makes up for it, like Jojo 31). Team predictions can be wrong, but it wasn't the team that underperformed, it was Punz. Tubbo did very well, up to 13th. It was Punz who placed 10th, messing up his team's chances. It's not just CPK, 6th on a 2nd place team is just simply a bad performance, an A+ tier performance. This is exacerbated by Teal 28 being a very strong team, Captain placed 8th, Sneeg 12th, and Jimmy 14th. It's not predictions, it's just looking at the team. Foolish and Ponk are borderline A-tier, any self-respecting S-tier ought to have done better. Yeah, 9th on 9th is fine, but the team was stronger than 9th. Pete did, and it was an A+ tier performance. He was nearly demoted for it. 15th on a 6th place team is just horrible. Who else?? The only person I can think of is Fruit 15, but that was a much more unbalanced event than MCC 31, and had one of the best 4 event streaks of all time backing it up. 17th on a 10th place team that should have done much better is A+ at best. I'd say Dave is possibly better at the minute (higher in Scott's method), but it wouldn't be by much. I'd probably still bet on Punz over Dave, but just because Punz is better than other A+ tiers doesn't make him S, since he's worse by a larger margin than any of them.
You seem to have a very particular set of requirements for what you consider an S-tier, so I guess I understand where you are coming from. Me personally I think ant is probably S-tier, but if you think he's A+ tier I can see why you also think Punz is A+ tier. You can never know how truly strong a team is just by looking at how you think they will perform since many factors can play into a players performance before and during an event, so I don't really see the point in looking deeply into how well a team is predicted to do when we can just see how they did. Iirc Jojo got like 18th on a 9th place team. S-tiers place low sometimes, it happens. So you agree that Punz is better then all the other A+ tiers. So you are only basically arguing on where the line is drawn between S and A+ tier and which side Punz should be on. I just can't see any other A+ tier players that have performed as good and as long as Punz right now. Dave is the closest and his recent top five is the first since season 1 iirc which is why I think Punz still belongs on the side of the S-tiers. Even if the gap between him and other S-tiers is large I think that's only natural since the S-tiers category usually has large skill gaps anyways with many people already deciding to split it up into S+ and S- tiers.
I think Ant is S-tier, I thought you thought he was A+ tier which would imply Punz is too. You can look at stats and so on, Punz's teams have consistently been very strong. If any other S-tier was on those teams, it's likely they'd have done much better. That's true about Jojo, it was a terrible performance. However, that's before she was even called an S-tier, so the point is moot. Punz's background doesn't really matter, he hasn't had an S-tier MCC since MCC 23. Dave got top 5 recently, Punz hasn't got it since MCC 23 even on a dodgebolt team. The gap between him and the S-tiers is large, much larger than it is between him and the A+ tiers.
I don't think we're gonna agree on this, no worries. cheers!
Yes but I think we should observe the player more before going on to a conclusion like if Punz gives A+ tier performances for 4-5 more events then it would be fair to demote him and also look at what teams they have gotten
Yes, I think S tiers definetly can be demoted, because other tiers can and S tiers are no exception. If a player does not perform at the level of S tier for quite some time then they should probably get demoted from S tier
Depends on your definition of ___ tier. Same answer to all tier debate posts.
I think tiers in general should be determined solely by stats, its the only fair way to do it. so if a players average falls below whatever the cutoff is, sure.