I think many people consider the AE as the most important tournament after the majors. Although I'd personally rate Asian Games as more important. But the point is that AE is big. The way you're arguing, I think you're not understanding what an "opinion" is!
just answer it, 2 vs 1, which one is better ? is it so difficult to answer ? for AE, AE only SSP. no less, no more.
Well, 1 is better, because it's my favourite number hehe. Also it's better to be number 1. A hilarious reply to a hilarious way of arguing I guess hehe. AE is indeed a SSP. But that doesn't mean it's equally as important to win as the other SSP.
LLW can win WC in WS and WD. Marin ? even SC level 2 is too difficult to her really, we can't compare level A player with level D player
so 1 title is better than 2 titles ? lol what a genius how is your math ? so I think is better to win nothing compare to win once, twice and so on ? is that right, mr / ms inconsistent ?
no problem for me, as you only can run and hide here and there... wrong analogy here and there... and contradictive post here and there
There's an obvious fallacy in your argument. No running and hiding required hehe. Just re-read previous posts.
I re-reply this post. so to be number 1, someone must win MORE or LESS ? and why you find it so difficult to answer which one is better ? 2 titles or 1 title ?
which one ? just show me. it is clear who the one in here with so many fallacy that make him / her run here and there
This is probably the most important post: Of course, you can always find "blips" (just like with ZYL/ZN and their 9-10 H2H), and that's just a matter of opinion. And the fact that you're using continuing to push such a fallacious argument shows that you know I'm right hehe.
Well you're pushing a fact that someone who has won more titles is greater than someone else. But the number of titles someone wins is just one of many "facts" that go into supporting the opinion of who is the GOAT. For example, in tennis, Djokovic has won 5 fewer Grand Slams than Federer, but in my opinion, I rate him as the GOAT. And I don't like Djokovic hehe.
Another example to demonstrate your fallacious argument is that LCW has won more career titles than LD. Does that make LCW a greater player than LD? No way. EDIT: just because 64 (titles) is greater than 62 (titles) doesn't make LCW a greater player than LD. Similarly, just because 2 (titles) is greater than 1 (title) doesn't mean someone is better than the other.
LCW won more title compare to LD ? read first my post to @Rob3rt before you comment CWG not count bcoz LD can't take part they are both equals with 62 titles, with LCW must thanks to Msia Satellite title who is even lower than 1 star event LCW already played for 765 matches while LD only 665 matches all 62 titles lol
And there you've just proven that your argument is fallacious - just because 64 is a bigger number than 62 doesn't mean the person with the bigger number is "better". Same as your 2 vs 1 argument! Good stuff.
Not sure what you're trying to demonstrate there hehe. As I said, it's a combination of facts that support my opinion.
