Yomi Innate or Nurtured?

i think its innate and must be nurtured. i mean u may see a scenario where all signs would say (jedi mind trick) opponent wants to duck p, and maybe he does regularly and even thinks it at home, but he's using his sub-blaze-and knows his duck p range is just short of everyone else. I mean u could be a gifted mind reader, pattern recognizer, and a sleuth to boot, but if ya dont know the game...

 

That's a good case for why it's nurtured, but why do you also think it's innate? I wasn't sure, but I think I'm prepared to declare I'm completely on the nurtured side now. I'm not gonna reiterate my whole last post... but the patterns you need to understand to show good yomi, can all be found by analysis of the rules. It only takes small adjustments to beat someone once you generally understand advantage/disadvantage (it has to only be small adjustments... the matches only last a minute or two...)

I'm seeing lots and lots of stuff that we all agree has to be learned before you can show any yomi. I'm not seeing anything that you have to know beforehand to enable you to employ that knowledge...

 

myke,

i understand how the thread got worse. and i apologize if it was fed off my post.

but i didnt change the definition of yomi

you and many people have the idea that yomi alone means "read the opponent", but yomi means "read"

reading your situation will keep control of your own momentum, and not always confined to your opponent's which is a vonerable place to stay.


im sorry if i felt that was important to mention.
no more then.

 

Who wants some really good Japanese yomi?
Contact me on ebay.
I'll hook you up /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

 

Wow, That's yomi right there folks.

 

DETECTIVE CRIKEY HAS STRUCK AGAIN!

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

 

Its ALWAYS a guess. There is no guarantee that the opponent will do what you think, even if he has been doing it 10 times a row. Induction is not a valid form of deduction, while most people think so. /semantics </div></div>

Thats based on the assumption that the opponents behavior is random. It is not. Opponents often repeat successful behavior. I know I do. Therefore induction becomes valid.

 

Thats based on the assumption that the opponents behavior is random. It is not. Opponents often repeat successful behavior. I know I do. Therefore induction becomes valid. </div></div>

Q.E.D

 

dont reply to this if you dont want to.

i was impplying that "reading" has multiple layers and the very act of reading information causes you to make decisions on a broader wave-length.

in this context i was using the word "read" as a subject, not a litteral definition.

i dont believe this.

i clearly explained the difference between being in a situation and (1)reading the opponent(USER), or (2)reading the situation.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
1) "CHIBITA's been pretty smart in these places, i better not do that!"

2) "LION is at disadvantage, he's aganst the WALL, his BEST OPTIONs are to wait or low P... >>i better backdash attack [incase he evades too.]

notice the difference between focusing on CHIBITA's mindset and focusing on LION's condition.-- abolishing any reluctant feelings to act.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

because after 10 yrs of having to deal with a scene that has an anti-climax such as Ryan, i would sincerely get punished twice over if i ever tried to read his habits alone.

think about it myke, or just ban me if you really cant stand to see my username again. im tired of this too.

if you want to reply to me in any shape or form, send me a PM.

 

What the fuck has the reasoning, logic or method with which the player "reads" the opponent has got to do with it being, or not being, yomi?

No matter if u are more skilled at reading your opponents' next move via knowledge of the system, or if you prefer to base your next response on your knowledge of the opponents' habits, tendencies or etc., the strategy is the same. The difference lies only in the method, the tactic.

Of course, a case could be made that one tactic should be called "reading [yomi-ing] the game" and the other "reading [yomi-ing] the player", but someone claiming that would only be, I believe, trying to win an argument.

When a VF-player "Observer1" says that a "playerA" has good yomi, he does not imply that the player specifically reads the opposing "playerB", or that playerA is reading the game itself.
Observer1 just looks at the result which at a glance could be described as: "playerA is highly successful at choosing/guessing the right response to playerB's actions, which means that PlayerA has got good yomi".

Therefore;
- Dividing yomi into different types of yomi is meaningless and backwards, because yomi is not a tactic itself - Yomi is a way of describing the endresult.
- We can not define yomi as exclusive only to "reading the opponent", since there is no way of knowing for certain whether a players' "good yomi" is in fact a result of the player actually "reading the opponent".
- Using the word yomi in senteces such as; "this player wins because of his good yomi", "you should work on your yomi-skills" is sloppy, since, again, yomi is not a single tactic.

But this post, and this whole thread, is theoretical - I am sure that usage of this word has evolved differently around the globe, and there really is no problem with that.

EDIT: Lol the last line I wrote here was so lame I just had to remove it ~_~.

 

Hahaha, when pride and ego collide /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif
Don't prove me wrong in public, Myke. You either PM me or ban me but don't you go showing me up like that.
LMAO XD

 

The problem with this statement is that you're making a false dichotomy. Chibita is, essentially, the premier lion player in the world. If you're in a situation where Lion has some specific advantage or disadvantage, then Chibita knows it, and he's going to play accordingly. Knowing what the best lion player's do, and knowing what Chibita will do are the same piece of information... there is no actual difference there.

And if you're talking about lesser players... then a player's habits always trump situational awareness. If you know you're opponent always makes a particular mistake in a given situation, then you don't need to know the "best" move in that situation. You only need to know how to counter your particular opponent's mistake. So again, only your opponent's habits is ever actually relevant. (Unless you're playing against someone you've never played before... in which I'd say you're not using yomi until a couple matches go by, and you start getting a feel for your opponent's style). Situational awareness is the stuff you get from reading frame data before you ever sit down for a match... it's the use of non-interactive game knowledge, so it's not yomi.

 

[why me.....]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The problem with this statement is that you're making a false dichotomy. Chibita is, essentially, the premier lion player in the world. If you're in a situation where Lion has some specific advantage or disadvantage, then Chibita knows it, and he's going to play accordingly. Knowing what the best lion player's do, and knowing what Chibita will do are the same piece of information... there is no actual difference there.</div></div>

wether the opponent knows more or less knowlege is unecessary.

Lion is only able to make choices confined to his condition.

these choices can be catagorized, nomatter how bizzare they appear on the surface.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
And if you're talking about lesser players... then a player's habits always trump situational awareness. If you know you're opponent always makes a particular mistake in a given situation, then you don't need to know the "best" move in that situation. You only need to know how to counter your particular opponent's mistake.</div></div>

mistakes will lose to exact frames, not readings.

on a more practical level, knowing the situation allows you to act on several possible outcomes, instead of just "one".

in the example situation, [backdash attack]ing Lion will cover:
A)evade
B)low P
C)hospital throw

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Situational awareness is the stuff you get from reading frame data before you ever sit down for a match... it's the use of non-interactive game knowledge, so it's not yomi</div></div>

it is the very content you are trying yomi.

 

Lol this thread is the Shiznittz

 

I yomi books.

 

Mistakes will lose to exact frames, yes. But, if my choices are to do my standard 50 damage max *guaranteed* combo, and some ridiculous 90 damage string that I know my current particular opponent will just stand there and take because he sucks, then I'm going for the 90.

That's the whole point isn't it... we use "yomi" as a term, to talk about pre-empting your opponent's mistakes to capitalize on additional non-guaranteed hits. Reading how to fuzzy, or how to combo, out of various strategy books and then applying it successfully is a slightly different topic.

We're both talking about a split between the amount of game knowledge you need to know to play (I can read in the wiki that low throw beats fuzzy), and the actual prediction you make during the game (I know my opponent is going to fuzzy right now). The only difference is you're referring to these as two "flavors" of yomi, and I would argue that we can only use yomi to talk about the second issue. The water's a little muddy though, since you can also read on the wiki when using fuzzy is a good idea, and use that knowledge to make your prediction, merely on the assumption that your opponent has also read the wiki. So, who knows...

Maybe we can just throw out the term yomi when talking in english, and say:
reading the opponent = timing
reading the situation = execution

 

I've always thought of execution as the act of actually being able to use your prediction of what you're opponent is going to do and actually use your counter to it correctly. There are a ton of times I've known something was coming just to fudge it up when they do it. That's very frustrating actually.

 

^ That's the worst when you know an actual direction they're gona throw, and you just happen to mess up the timing of the break haha.

 

sorias, to be honest, i think anything you mention on this note has already been covered.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Mistakes will lose to exact frames, yes. But, if my choices are to do my standard 50 damage max *guaranteed* combo, and some ridiculous 90 damage string that I know my current particular opponent will just stand there and take because he sucks, then I'm going for the 90.</div></div>
--

please read the [`backdash attack' at ->`advantage' ] scenario again.

what you are doing here is taking the opponent's reaction --> over the frames of your situation.

it is due to your situation that you can play this way, because anything else (say for example your opponent starts attacking back) can be beaten by the 50 damage option.

if you read based on your opponent alone, then you may miss this point, and instead lose to 10 other habits while trying to read 1.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">we use "yomi" as a term, to talk about pre-empting your opponent's mistakes</div></div>

i can hardly find a use in "reading" somebody who is unaware what they are doing.