Greatest Match in CTWC History BREAKDOWN | Joseph Saelee vs Greentea [CTMA]

[@ITZsharky1]

A couple of important things. 1 this is quite long because we go heavily in-depth in the games. So for ease of access here are the time stamps for the games. Game 1 1:35 | Game 2 26:55 | Game 3 41:12 | Game 4 1:09:57 | This video has been in production for over 48 hours of raw time and has been a work-in-progress for months. This is the most time-intensive video I've ever made and I'm glad it is done! I experimented with several new things since the last video of CTMA and I'm excited for all to watch it and to give feedback on it. Also, the background is an original song made for CTMA. The name of the song is called "Between the Lines". There might be more in the future and maybe even a full soundtrack that might get released later. Currently, the song is for private use but that may change in the future! Also, one thing in game 2 on the first mistake the Z could also go in column 1-3, however, is much more aggressive.

[@aSongScout]

Awesome!!

[@michael2244]

Hey you're that one guy :D

[@zachhazen3897]

These are great. One major critique - when playing out "what if" scenarios to argue what they should have done, it's less helpful are arguably unfair to use more information than a player had at the moment of the decision. No one has foresight past the next box. The better option is to make the best move with the knowledge one has considering roughly equal odds of any of the seven showing up next. Some moves look optimal here for these sequences, but no one can plan on sequences, or be expected to optimize sequences, since they are unknowable at the time of decision. Overall though, just great thought and production.

[@ITZsharky1]

Fair point . In the video that’s why I said moves were based on board accommodation. No player will ever know the piece sequence but in doing a certain move the board becomes accommodated for the next piece(s) and they would have the option to act upon it. This is more so to showing stacking theory and why doing a move differently would’ve resulted in a potentially different outcome. That is my approach to these kinds of videos However on games that are non same piece set I just focus on immediate accommodation since the number of inputs could potentially change your piece after the next box piece

[@zachhazen3897]

@@ITZsharky1 agree with above, and watched the whole video in awe of the work that went into it. If you were to make it strictly *fair* you'd have to play out what ifs only on the current piece and the next box piece. Not the one after that, 3rd,4th,5th piece that happened to show up on this specific game. I'd treat it like the two pieces we know, then potentially any of the seven following. Best accommodation would handle any 7 after the two known pieces, not just the one that showed up that Green Tea and Joseph couldn't know was coming.

[@ITZsharky1]

Yeah I take that 2 piece approach whenever I breakdown anything without same piece sets. I guess one thing I should clarify in the next one is that the first 2 pieces are adjustments that could be made and then the pieces that follow from that section of the seed would be placements that COULD happen and be most optimal and efficient for both survival and scoring. The reason I go into the pieces afterward is to show Stacking Theory. The goal is not to just show the adjustments that could’ve been made to prevent scoring potential loss but to rather show the audience patterns,parities, and various builds allowing everyone to evaluate the accommodation of the builds. This is both to be taken as analyzing the match and exploring stacking theory

[@psychotheunsane7285]

@@ITZsharky1 This is akin to looking multiple moves ahead in chess, a vital skill in high level play. In a way, Tetris is a chess-like game, in that you have to keep possible piece sequences in mind whilst you place each piece. Balancing ideal board shape against going for points is a major strategic factor.

[@Flyzguy]

@@psychotheunsane7285 exactly. And RNG will give you one of 7 possible pieces, so a full analysis has to consider all of those possibilities. There could be a move that works really well for 1 piece but disastrous for another. If a move accommodates 5/7 then it's better than if it accommodates 2/7. If you know the whole sequence like this video, you can pick select moves that work for those pieces that are not necessarily the best odds normally. This also means sometimes the best statistical move is punished by RNG. It's not fair!

[@chrisshu3520]

Major props for taking the time to edit this.

[@ITZsharky1]

Thank you!

[@GodLandon]

Sad I missed this til just now awesome vid

[@broskydoodle6697]

This was by the far the BEST tetris match I have ever seen. GreenTea's maxout was jaw dropping

[@ITZsharky1]

BROSKY DOODLE it was a fantastic match and something tells me we might see more of these next year

[@GamerRocket]

I more than appreciate the animations for this. Tetris players who aren't as experienced are going to have a much easier time following this with those animations. Thanks a ton miboi. Hope your day is going well

[@ITZsharky1]

Without animations this video would be NOWHERE near as insightful and educational as the current way it is. Yeah it took considerable time to do but it was well worth it

[@GamerRocket]

@@ITZsharky1 I also want to say how much it means to me (and probably Greentea and Joseph themselves) that you took time to go over the good plays/moves each player did. If you didn't cover any of the good moments, this would've just felt negative. Showing an analysis of those highlights can point out some things some players might've missed. And that just adds to this already amazing matchup. Much appreciation. I also enjoyed the background music haha

[@dxo8809]

Best tetris analysis video ever made. While this one truly is fantastic I hope my previous statement is contestable in the future. Keep it up man.

[@jerpidude8416]

One of the best tetris players talking about how the best game between some of the best players could have been even better. Truly the best video.

[@ITZsharky1]

Thank you 😊

[@Master-dy7sh]

oh wow getting over it

[@Adam-fb5nt]

I think some moves made by elite players that seem sub-optimal and inefficient are actually the safest possible move available. If you see an odd delayed burn or tuck setup that avoids spires in the middle or dependencies on the left side of the stack, those are patented Jonas moves to ensure survival against the worst possible piece sequences. Until 2018, this "aggressively safe" strategy practically guaranteed Jonas the title, while players who were simply aggressive always tripped up at some point during the bracket. Its a testament to the amazing skill of Greentea and Joseph that they can max-out while still employing elements of this advanced defensive tournament strategy Jonas developed. Just my 2c as a guy who's watched more Tetris than almost anyone!

[@ITZsharky1]

Yes! Delay burns a creative formations are an integral part of my gameplay. I learned a few from watching him but I discovered my own patterns as well. I feel that creative, efficient builds will be the future of competitive because as demonstrated by Joseph the player base can get incredibly stronger!

[@jedediahreaver210]

Truly words of wisdom from a truly aknowledgeable guy from the tetris community.

[@psychotheunsane7285]

Very insightful analysis video. What-if videos like this are fun to watch, because you see possible ways that the game could've gone to the other player. This proves that NO game is truly out of reach for either player. No win is guaranteed.

[@n1csgamingchannel580]

Dog and Koryan: Allow us to introduce ourselves

[@Yubin_Lee_Doramelin]

Oh, gosh, Sharky! Thank you for analyzing legendary CTWC match by two MASTERS OF MASTERS of Tetris. This is the best analysis video I've ever watched!

[@ITZsharky1]

I’m so glad you enjoyed it!

[@linsanity6640]

Both players are my favorite and I was disappointed they were matched up, I wish they met in the finals, it was incredible!!!

[@ITZsharky1]

I was hyped because I know it could go either way and koryan v greentea if he won, would’ve been epic

[@linsanity6640]

@@ITZsharky1 but Joseph prevailed once again, he speaks for the young part of the tetris community

[@ITZsharky1]

Lin Sanity yup that’s how here. I think greentea is also considered part of the young or NewGen (as I like to call us newer players) since he’s almost 22

[@KevAlberta]

This is exactly the type of CT breakdown videos I wanted. So happy someone (aka you) are producing such high quality videos. For us all to view. I hope to see more. Great work!! (18:32 time stamp for me to continue later)

[@ITZsharky1]

Thank you!

[@beans_renzo]

I love these mini documentaries learning about Tetris and the players, thanks Sharky

[@ITZsharky1]

Thank you for watching!

[@TristopTetris]

Holy crap, one hour? Very nicely made Sharky.

[@ITZsharky1]

It was a lot to go into

[@ScottobozoRaC]

Great video! There were a couple things that seemed missing though. I didn't look super in-depth on all of the points you made, but these are the most notable things which jumped out at me. 31:30 - I personally don't like the solutions you showed here, as they tend to leave greentea not tetris ready for a much longer time. A better solution in my opinion would be to put the L on the left like greentea did, but use the S and Z on the right to get tetris ready (S on column 6-7 and Z on column 8-9) I also feel that greentea's attempts at a center well in game 2 (36:25) are justified. He didn't want to burn the 3 lines to get back to a right side well because he was so far behind. It was just a bad time for a drought / TSZ burst. While your analysis is primarily considering the board state, it is worth noting that if greentea burned the 3 lines like you suggested, he wouldn't have had enough material left to score a tetris with the next I piece, and there was a 28 piece drought after that. I think there is some analysis that could've been done with the center well setup, especially at the start of level 21. 1:12:00 Another option here, while much more difficult, is to place the L in column 2-3. If you planned to place the L in 3-4, and just waited to look at the next piece before you rotate, you could place the L in column 2-3 without any extra inputs.

[@ITZsharky1]

31:30 I went for a conservative solution. Most of all solutions were in fact with conservatism in mind 36:25 I don't disagree with the center well but I think you missed the point I was going for. This reason why I said to burn the 3 lines is that he sacrificing WAY fewer points this way and will maybe have to burn 3-5 lines (totaling 5-8 lines) as opposed to 26. Not at all solutions were meant to get a player Tetris ready but to put them in the best position for either survival, scoring or both. 1:12:00 GREAT FIND! I agree it is more difficult if you're not set on doing it in the first place. Thank you for your input!

[@tonyamaya6972]

I was late to work because I got stuck watching this match originally and forgot what time it was. Never been glued in like that before

[@ITZsharky1]

This match was truly captivating. The atmosphere in the room was unreal

[@tonyamaya6972]

@@ITZsharky1 indeed. This match had a certain chemistry and the obvious weight. It combined to be emotional and enjoyable. Moreso than any other I've watched before or since. I'm sure we will see greentea again next year. Maybe the brackets will let us get to a Joseph vs Greentea finals

[@tonyamaya6972]

@@ITZsharky1 also, intense respect to you for this edit. I can't imagine how much work this was. To analyze each sequence and show the possibilities... When they're somewhat endless if you want them to be, nice work

[@ITZsharky1]

Tony Amaya Tony Amaya not if I have something to say about it🤣. In all seriousness though we’ll probably see more matches like this this upcoming year Thank you! It did take a lot of work but I’m proud of how in turn out. I can’t wait to start cracking down on the rest of CTWC

[@josiahmanson]

This is a great video, very helpful to have a discussion of the scenarios. Keep up the good work!

[@WilcoStrydom]

Quality analysis and animations. Great stuff.

[@kugelblitzingularity304]

I do agree with some of your recommendations, but I much prefer the riskier plays from these Tetris players, because it makes the match much more interesting. One reason for playing riskier is that RNG may help you out and give you a cleaner game than if you play clean. Another reason is that it is more challenging for the players to control the situation after having a suboptimal board, whether by doing insane adjustments, flips and burns. That's why I love Joseph's and Jakegames' playstyle, because everything they do challenges them, and if handled greatly, they may get much further ahead than playing textbook safe.

[@ITZsharky1]

Fair point. But not all adjustments were safe. But they for the most part are efficient. There is two main ways to play NESTetris. Tournament and HighScore. The adjustments were done with the principals of tournament Tetris in mind. Aggressiveness is fine but also at the same time there must be a balance. Over aggression commonly leads to either early top outs or multiple burn lines to either just stay alive or get out of a dig. Trust me a find watching creative builds fascinating and entertaining to watch but at the same time this breakdown is to highlight principles of stacking theory, and the cost of certain burn states. Thank you for you contribution to the discussion 😃

[@NvrPhazed]

great breakdown. One of my favorite matches.

[@archierm]

This is good stuff Sharky, very cool.

[@ITZsharky1]

Thank you!

[@djinthemixxX]

This deserves way more views, hope Joseph and green tea see it haha

[@djinthemixxX]

Also could you do analyzes of the recent combined high scores at CTM

[@ITZsharky1]

djinthemixxX Thank you. I know that they both watched it. Analyzing CTM matches would be hard because same pieces aren’t use. Because of the way rng works the sequences wouldn’t of been the same with any additional inputs

[@GregCannon7]

Really sick! The production value is really high on this. I would however echo Zach Hazen's critique, which is to not focus as much on the 3rd, 4th, 5th piece after a move, since the players don't have access to that information. Since you strive to focus on board accomodation, it might be better to compare the boards side by side after *that placement only* (and maybe the next piece), and talk about how accommodating it is for various types of pieces. Also, I think it would be interesting to also highlight mistakes that weren't punished, i.e. if they make a bad dependency but get lucky RNG and their score doesn't suffer. I think it'd be really interesting to see as a player.

[@radleigh5537]

Very Good analysis! I just got my first lvl 19 max and Im so happy!

[@ITZsharky1]

Did you get it on video 😃

[@radleigh5537]

@@ITZsharky1 I didnt though thats the worst part

[@ITZsharky1]

Radleigh Amparo aww you gotta record those lol I’d love to see it

[@radleigh5537]

@@ITZsharky1 I have a stream account called metalmonkey but idk how to do those so I just play on my own lolz

[@ITZsharky1]

Radleigh Amparo phone recording will be fine though. The way the community is they won’t consider it official unless you have video proof.

[@michael2244]

Tetris of the year goes to Greentea for the second year in a row

[@naropaperez8065]

I really like where you're going with this video. I recommend for you to make a list of pieces that would fit without burning after every move to make your arguements more persuasive. If you claim theres a mistake - pieces that would fit without burning is less than the correct move. You also have to account for next piece information, it's a hard thing to prove but if you want to follow hard tetris theory that's the path you need to take to be convincing. Besides if you show it visually you dont have to say it out loud after every mistake

[@ITZsharky1]

That would ideal yes. But for the most part the “mistakes” resulted in a lot of scoring potential lost and in a match tournament Tetris is being played, so the objective is to stay alive and be efficient. Not to score a 1.2 or 1.3 etc. A comment earlier said that I should’ve done that. I should’ve made it clear that the first 2 pieces for each sequence is what could be placed and pieces that followed, have places that could be placed for ideal and efficient play Lastly column call outs were done because I can’t edit the animations before recording. Doesn’t work well with my work flow and I feel it helps other viewers/players able to follow what the animations are doing. Thank for your feedback. I will take it into consideration on my next solo commentary breakdown

[@lukastaylor9544]

When you look at what they should've done, do you only look one piece ahead?

[@ITZsharky1]

Sorry meant to respond to this earlier. For same piece sets i look more than one piece ahead as the sequence doesn't change. But there is mainly an emphasis on board accommodation and efficiency in the placements i observe

[@SamsarasArt]

This is incredibly detailed

[@loreenams.9027]

Great video Sharky~

[@TwistedUpMusic]

Joseph saw this. I saw this. We both like

[@Peyethon]

DanQZ and Josh could barely concentrate on their match through all that excitement.

[@ITZsharky1]

I’m sure it was difficult but it something that be done. This upcoming year we might see even more hype from games!

[@Peyethon]

I know, The Dan vs Josh match even went to 5 games if I’m correct.

[@ITZsharky1]

Blake Hutchison it did! Despite all the hype generated by Joseph and greentea their game is worth analyzing too, one I get to then

[@nycReaching]

Excellent stuff 👌

[@Honey_Beef]

ORIGINAL: I beg to differ for the statement "Joseph played near perfect" as I slowly discovered that he could have set a WR (1.3M) (or at least a 1.2M, that's for sure) without playing any more aggressive. Originally want to put a paragraph-long comment (which I would still do), I decided to put a comment here first before the analysis is finished. Will edit this comment later (probably tomorrow / within this week) after I finished all that. Anyway, nice video, Sharky! Looking forward to see more of these soon. One thing that I would like is the "player's solution" and the "suggested solution" play together piece by piece, so that we can see which I-piece is utilised. (P.s.: Don't comment yet, this is only a temporary comment) ------------------ EDIT: I am going to edit little by little since I start to realise how long it is. All timestamps mentioned are going to be based on the fullscreen version of this match. Also, my own 18 PB is just 165K, so don't mind me if these are stupid suggestions and unrealistic. Oh yeah, and you can comment now. Let me know what do you think about this! ------------------ 11:47 (Joseph's solution) In (12:00) of the match, you can see that Joseph started taking burns. He ended up taking 3 singles, plus not utilising the long bar in (12:15) and then taking another single with the T-piece, as a total of 4 burns. What can be done to prevent that? It turns out that it was due to the board health starting from (11:47). I'm going to label the J-piece (#1), the following S (#2) and so on. Placing #1 on columns 8-9 like what Joseph did is not optimal. As long as a S / Z comes, Joseph is basically guaranteed to build a dependency. As long as an Z comes, Joseph will then be forced to place it on columns 6-7 to set up a J-L dependency; as long as an S comes (which it did, #2), Joseph is then forced to place it on columns 5-6. Then, as long as a Z or O doesn't come (which neither of them did), columns 5-7 are either covered with: - J piece (which Joseph got, #3), Joseph is then forced to place it on columns 7-8 to set up O basket; or - L piece, Joseph will then be forced to place it on columns 6-7 to set up O basket / 7-8 to set up L-J dependency; or - T or S piece, Joseph will then be forced to place it on columns 6-7 to set up I-J dependency; or - I piece, which Joseph would obviously use it to Tetris first. All in all, this is not the best placement. With this board health maintained after the Tetris on #7 (11:52), his board is not accommodating enough. This resulted in the delayed J-burn in #10, and then I-J dependency in #12, resulting in 3 burns instead of 1 (the minimum amount of burns due to the delayed burn setup), plus not utilising long bar #30. Then, in the wise words of ITZSharky1: "So, what could he have done?" [Score of lines 29-41 = 22800 + 760 + 760 + 760 + 22800 + 760= 48640 (67% TRT)] (Suggested solution) It is to place #1 on columns 3-4. Then the S-pieces would have nice places, plus set up a double well. The following sequence it quite obvious (and redundant; I have drafted 26 of them, and there is actually 30), so I will not talk about them. This could have made Joseph get Tetris ready for long bar #30. Plus, this is "without playing more aggressive" as shown in the introduction. It only builds Joseph to a 12-high situation, which Joseph could definitely afford, and will afford as shown later in the same game. [Score of lines 29-41 = 22800 * 3 = 68400 (100% TRT)] Extra of 19760 points ------------------ 13:30 (Joseph's solution) Before looking at what the non-optimal decision is, let's look at the board situation. What's wrong with it? 3... 2... 1... I'm tired of explaining, because it really is the exact same situation as demonstrated in (2:50 of this video). Sharky is better at explaining stuff than me, so watch there (2:50 - 3:15 of this video). Jagged formation on columns 5-8. But it is not exactly a problem at all yet, since it really isn't too jagged, you may argue. And I agree. What makes it "wrongly" jagged is the decision on (13:30), where he put the T piece (#1) on columns 3-4. This makes the board too jagged. Not only does this board health force into a delayed burn in #4, but it also puts him into very dangerous multiple-dependency situations. RNG helped him out so that it only took 2 burns, but it could have been way worse. [Score of lines 69-77 = 22800 + 760 + 760 + 0.5 * 22800 (half a Tetris) = 35720 (75% TRT)] (Suggested solution) To place the T-piece on columns 5-7 would probably be better. Although it does not accommodate the S-piece quite yet, it is obvious that the board health is way better, plus he could have easily set up tucks. Following the sequence, he could have built a way healthier board, plus get Tetris ready very early, on #3 where the O-piece is placed on columns 8-9. It isn't the best solution (still not very accommodating), but given the not-the-best board we got from (13:30), this is what we could have done. Question left on to you guys (since I can't really think of it): what is a better solution / how to prevent the semi-unhealthy board situation we got in (13:30)? [Score of lines 69-77 = 22800 + 22800 = 45600 (100% TRT)] Extra of 9880 points (doesn't look much, but the small optimisations together makes a big difference, plus it could have been way more with bad RNG) ------------------ (To be cont'd with more score optimisations)

[@ITZsharky1]

For some reason this comment was marked as spam... But this is great. For your suggestion to put both solutions side be side would require me to do more animation especially if there are a lot more mistakes in any give game than this one. But your comment is fantastic!

[@brodindamp]

I like this video.

[@FlyntOakwood]

Fantastic analysis of this amazing game. Thanks for this. Tiny correction: it's accommodation/accommodating, not accommidation/accommidating.

[@ITZsharky1]

😂 took me a while to figure out what you meant. Probably comes from when I try I put emphasis on the word. Or maybe it’s the way I was taught to say it lol. Anyways thank you for watching!

[@FlyntOakwood]

@@ITZsharky1 it's a very minor thing, loved the video, keep up the great work. Subscribed!

[@Iyuselic]

hype!

[@miva1214]

thanks for the animation it really helps, must be real work tho

[@ITZsharky1]

Without the animations this wouldn’t be nearly as insightful. Very few people would be able to follow without having to pause it

[@michael2244]

And there's still a game going on between Josh and Danqz

[@CheezTetris]

4:00 Moo thing though :)

[@i.pfreely6204]

Good job Captain Hindsight

[@Flyzguy]

I don't think it's captain hindsight until knowledge past the next box is used. If we stick to the same knowledge these two amazing brains had at the time, and no more, then it's fair.

[@ITZsharky1]

Thank you. But I think you miss the overall goal. This is to show the how the outcome could’ve been changed if certain changes were made In stacking. The piece sequences that followed after the first 2 pieces were to be taken as “this piece could then go here because the board is accommodated for it”

[@Flyzguy]

@@ITZsharky1 I thought the goal was stacking theory, which is not about certain pieces, it's about accomodating any piece as much as possible while maintaining board health. To actually take this on would be like 7x or 49x the work, since if you wanted to go a few pieces past the next box, the permutations get crazy. For example, in some of these you go maybe 5 pieces past the next box? So you're picking one path of 7^5 possible paths the game could have gone with the knowledge any stacker would be limited to. But that's way too many boards to draw so it's unreasonable! If we got tools to really easily 7 pieces, then I could maybe see exploring one move after the next box to see how each piece may or may not have been accommodated.

[@ITZsharky1]

I’m going after only the sequence while board accommodation is the focus I want certain stacking principles to be the take away. I plan to structure my next solo one differently so this won’t be as big of a issue

[@Flyzguy]

@@ITZsharky1 well at the end of the day you are an incredible stacker so even the consideration for the 1/7 piece is going to be backed by great instincts. And lots of time you give alternates. Don't get me wrong this is amazing and to do it 100% would require so many animations. Can't wait to see what's next

[@cassiofbs]

Boom! Tetris for Jeff!

[@CheatD1n]

#Greentea

[@ShyGamerVibes]

Dedication I wish I had lol

[@ITZsharky1]

Lol. If I don’t do it then no one will 😅

[@ShyGamerVibes]

@@ITZsharky1 true lol

[@BobertTJohnson]

I disagree with your suggestion at around 37:00 Greentea is down 174,120 points and was trying to play aggressive to catch up. Instead of burning out lines he wanted to set up for a dirty centerwell tetris. His real problem was the mistake on rotating the T-piece at 142 lines. If it was a close game taking those burns is the right move but here Greentea knew he had to play aggressively and not burn lines. Just my opinion and I know you know a lot more aboot tetris than I do.

[@ITZsharky1]

That's true. But Playing for survival is a very important part of tournament Tetris. Keep in mind he lost 130k potential score from lv 20-22 because of how much the missed adjustment cost him. That T piece only had a few places to go and most of them resulted in parity or bad board accommodation. In placing that T piece there, there were only 3 pieces to resolve it cleanly and he eventually did get them. However, he did a bad placement on the S forcing more issues. In the burn sequence, there were several opportunities that he could've gotten out of it or had a cleaner build but i didn't point those out because my solution would've prevented it in general. Nonetheless, it was a really good point out. I did see more missed adjustments but still, center wells are harder to maintain so who knows what kind % out of the 130k points he lost that he could've maintained. Thanks for your input!

[@BobertTJohnson]

@@ITZsharky1 I just want to say that its really cool that you reply to almost all of the comments on your videos, even the ones that come 3 months after the video is posted. Keep up the great videos coming!

[@ianKanetsu]

An hour and a half educational video? Don’t mind if I do :)

[@natswanson27]

This would be much more entertaining/beneficial if either Joseph or Greentea (the people actually playing here) made this kind of video saying what they would do differently. Seems like a lot of your suggestions are just opinion based with additional future piece knowledge.

[@ITZsharky1]

Although that is one way to do it, that requires at lot more effort than the countless hours already put in to the video. At the time I didn’t have connections to JD nor greentea and even now I only have connections towards one of them so making that happen would be incredibly difficult This is for analysis purposes to display aspects of stacking theory to should what COULD happen if piece were placed in a more optimal position whether it be to prevent massive amounts of burned lines or to simply get out of a dig slightly safer. I do admit I presented the board state with pieces in the future incorrectly and didn’t have a proper disclaimer on the purpose behind the piece sequences in the future. I do appreciate the feedback though

[@ITZsharky1]

The placement I suggested are of course going to be influenced by my opinion but in some cases where I studied board states for minutes upon minutes finding out what placement could’ve prevent these thing these placement seemed most logical and in most cases were the most efficient way without put a player in danger.

[@kypdurron62]

Dude how did I not know you had a KZbin channel? I am a failure...

[@ITZsharky1]

kypdurron62 it’s fine lol. At least you’re here now!

[@LewisBeckman]

Jesus. I'm watching Tetris analysis videos now. Wait, no I'm not. Sorry bro. Good stuff though XD

[@ITZsharky1]

Lol it’s fine. It’s quite the niche audience

[@moneymikz]

Greatest match ever?? Koryan/Dog...hold my Sake/Capri Sun

[@colin351]

heck yeah, this is the kind of autism i love haha

[@ITZsharky1]

Otto Skorzeny ?