GameFAQs Contests
Contest Stats and Discussion - Part 1029
This is what we've been waiting for, folks! ~*creativename's contest site (all things contest!)*~ www.gamefaqscontests.com ~*The Board 8 Wiki (lots of useful contest and board information, including all past Post-Contest Analysis from Ulti, transience, Ed Bellis and others)*~ http://board8.wikia.com/ ~*List of All Polls (a search bar is at the bottom)*~ http://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/index.html ~*NGamer64's Archive Sites (good stuff!) and (LOL) X-Stats Sim (some offensive language)*~ http://www.thengamer.com/ http://thengamer.com/xstats ~*GameFAQs Contests Hall of Fame*~ http://board8.wikia.com/wiki/GameFAQs_Contests_Hall_of_Fame http://board8.wikia.com/wiki/GameFAQs_Contests_Match_Hall_of_Fame ~*Character Contest Histories*~ http://board8.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Contest_Histories ~*Simple Explanation of Extrapolated Standings*~ A = Strongest Character B = Character Weaker than A C = Character Weaker than B To figure out a character's Xsts Percentage ---> [(CvB)(BvA)]/50 = CvA To compare how C would do against B ---> [(CvA)/(BvA)]*50 = CvB To figure out how B would do against A ---> [(CvA)/(CvB)]*50 = BvA ~*All the Match Pics*~ http://www.gamefaqscontests.com/gallery/index.php ~*Leonhart4's Trend Charts*~ https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?hl=en&key=tOGmynfNIiNy5VukpEF-PdA&hl=en#gid=0 ~*Acronyms and Percentages for Dummies*~ http://board8.wikia.com/wiki/Acronyms_and_Percentages ~*Say What? Common Stats Topic Lingo Defined*~ SFF (Same Fanbase Factor) - Same Fanbase Factor is the theory that, if two contestants share a common fanbase, the weaker of the two options will underperform in a direct matchup. For instance, Link was expected to defeat Ganon with 65% of the vote in 2004, based on their 2003 values. Instead, Link collected near 88% of the vote. This is the best example of SFF we've ever seen. However take some SFF labels with a grain of salt, as many people will slap it onto any match that doesn't make perfect sense. Extrapolated Standings - The mathematical "strength" of a contestant that's determined based on their performance relative to the rest of the field. This number is typically based on the contest entrant's loss, but adjustments are sometimes made. See above for a watered down explanation for how the stats are calculated. --- "What's wrong with bootblacking? We like it very much!" This is Yesmar. |
 |
Mario/Sonic would be getting 90%+ on either entrant right now --- http://i.minus.com/iH9vIGOBoyTQ2.gif |
Remember when it looked like the finals of 2005 might be Mario Vs. Sonic! --- "What's wrong with bootblacking? We like it very much!" This is Yesmar. |
I don't remember anyone thinking that! Even me, and I had Sonic beating Mega Man! --- http://www.gifsoup.com/view/593815/frasier-and-niles-dance-o.gif |
I don't remember anyone thinking that! Even me, and I had Sonic beating Mega Man! I just double checked the stats topics at the time and people were definitely talking about it circa R3. It was never the favorite, but it was considered within the realm of possibility. --- "What's wrong with bootblacking? We like it very much!" This is Yesmar. |
We
may have discussed it in the sense of "Hey, that'd be cool," but very
few people were actually thinking Sonic had a chance against Mega Man,
and most people still weren't convinced Mario was beating Samus at the
time, of course. --- http://i43.tinypic.com/dgwh0.gif http://www.majhost.com/gallery/atukam/OHWD/snownd.gif |
I'd feel sorry for Sonic but this is so disgraceful that I can't. Hope he gets put up against Squall next contest. --- Praise the Black Turtle, Game of the Decade Guru Champ. (Well, I never promised creativity, did I?!) |
In
round 3 Mario beating Samus was considered a possibility, heck
according to the oracle Mario > Samus became the slight favourite and
that's after you consider people tend to be stubborn and side with
their bracket in the oracle. The whole Crono/Mega Man/Sonic was also
debated. I don't think a lot of people felt it was going to happen, but it was interesting to discuss. --- BOP Results: http://www.freewebs.com/charmander6000/Rivalry%20BOP.xls Rivalry Rumble: 57/64 Today: Mario/Bowser |
Yesterday's chart: Time | Dangil | Soriku | Votes | Demographic EBV | 45.96% | 54.04% | 520 | (0:00-0:05) PHV | 47.39% | 52.61% | 4355 | (0:00-1:00) FNV | 50.09% | 49.91% | 10150 | (1:00-6:00) BSV | 52.14% | 47.86% | 4655 | (6:00-9:00) DSV | 47.89% | 52.11% | 12875 | (9:00-14:30) ASV | 49.24% | 50.76% | 13508 | (14:30-22:00) SNV | 48.82% | 51.18% | 2710 | (22:00-24:00) Dante/Vergil do well overnight and early in the morning, but the rest of the match was all Sora/Riku. --- "Why must we always choose between certain death and probable death?" "I'm in an epic battle to the death, FIGURE IT OUT YOURSELF!" |
Mario
beating Samus became more widely discussed after the beatdown Mario put
on Zero, but until then, nobody who didn't pick Mario for reasons other
than "IT'S FRIGGIN' MARIO!" was really changing their minds about it
yet. And I don't remember very many people thinking Sonic had a chance to go that far! Yeah, only 13 out of 67 actually picked Sonic to beat Mega Man in the Oracle. --- http://i.imgur.com/CbfFb.jpg |
The whole Crono/Mega Man/Sonic thing was discussed, but to no surprise Crono > Mega Man was the favourite. Just like in 2006 with Snake included. --- BOP Results: http://www.freewebs.com/charmander6000/Rivalry%20BOP.xls Rivalry Rumble: 57/64 Today: Mario/Bowser |
Sonic
> Crono was one of the sweetest upsets that paid off ever. I know it
was just about obvious that Sonic was going to pull off the comeback
about halfway through the match, but that update when he took the
lead... So amazing. --- "But you have been given freedom. Freedom to be...outside." "I am lightning...the rain transformed." |
So horrifying. But for 2005, I don't remember Mario/Sonic discussion......I do remember Samus/Tifa finals discussion, and Samus/Vincent finals discussion. --- 2002 Link, 2003 Cloud, 2004 Link, 2005 Link, 2006 Link, 2008 Link, 2010 Link, 2011 Cloud. Link 6, Cloud 2 |
I remember Tifa/Vincent to the Final Four discussion. Good times to be had by all. --- http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2011/8/22/2094c2de-bae8-4f5b-9f27-67eaff0aaeaf.jpg |
Mario
beating Samus became more widely discussed after the beatdown Mario put
on Zero, but until then, nobody who didn't pick Mario for reasons other
than "IT'S FRIGGIN' MARIO!" was really changing their minds about it
yet. We had better reasoning than that. It's Friggin' Mario is the logic people use to argue Mario over Link and Mario over Cloud. Most annoying contest logic ever. --- 2002 Link, 2003 Cloud, 2004 Link, 2005 Link, 2006 Link, 2008 Link, 2010 Link, 2011 Cloud. Link 6, Cloud 2 |
Oh!
There was discussion about a Samus/Zelda/Tifa/Vincent final 4.
Strangely enough, the Samus/Zelda part came true the next year. --- 2002 Link, 2003 Cloud, 2004 Link, 2005 Link, 2006 Link, 2008 Link, 2010 Link, 2011 Cloud. Link 6, Cloud 2 |
From: red sox 777 | #015 I didn't say everyone picked Mario for that reason. Although Mario pickers honestly got lucky because there was no way they could've predicted the Nintendo Boost, which was more of a Mario Boost than anything else. Samus 2004 was clearly stronger than Mario 2004. I'm not entirely convinced Mario would've beaten Samus in 2004. I'm sure SOMEBODY will call me an idiot for thinking there's an instance where Samus could beat Mario, but Mario was a completely different animal from 2005 on. --- "Hold on a minute! That testimony stinks!" "Witness! You can't just say 'Hello' and expect us to get anywhere! I want you to testify!" |
And Team Sonic continues it's contest tradition of completely embarrassing itself. Damn you Sonic for screwing up my Oracle so bad. Augh. From: LeonhartFour | #057Although Mario pickers honestly got lucky because there was no way they could've predicted the Nintendo Boost, which was more of a Mario Boost than anything else. Samus 2004 was clearly stronger than Mario 2004. I'm not entirely convinced Mario would've beaten Samus in 2004. Bingo. The Mario that led freakin' Shadow get 45% on him probably would have lost to Samus. People just forget how much weaker Mario was. --- www.gamefaqscontests.com www.gamefaqscontests.com/gallery |
Regarding
level of SFF, if you use my linear estimator with a "tag team"
assumption and use my adjusted values of 43% for Mario, 35% for Bowser,
35% for Sonic (wow, Sonic and Bowser were equal last contest?) and 17%
for Robotnik (based on the Villains contest): http://www.gamefaqscontests.com/drupal/node/53?input_values=Mario%3D43%0D%0ABowser%3D35%0D%0ASonic%3D35%0D%0ARobotnik%3D17 You end up with about 64.4% for Mario/Bowser. I figured though Sonic would get some respect. Stupid me - Sonic getting respect? Haha. God I'm dumb. So looks like there's about 7-9% of SFF here. --- www.gamefaqscontests.com www.gamefaqscontests.com/gallery |
From: creativename | #019 Bowser's ranking is likely inflated by Charizard being stronger against Mario than he was at any other point in the contest. --- http://i.minus.com/iH9vIGOBoyTQ2.gif |
We're so bored, we actually spent a few pages debating what a close match was. --- *is Dranze* I lost my girl and lost to Black Turtle. Can't get worse. |
creativename posted... Regarding level of SFF, if you use my linear estimator with a "tag team" assumption and use my adjusted values of 43% for Mario, 35% for Bowser, 35% for Sonic (wow, Sonic and Bowser were equal last contest?) and 17% for Robotnik (based on the Villains contest): Are you factoring in how the villains are being SFFed by their rivals first, in considering how much strength they add to their team? For instance, this match should be closer than a match between Mario/--- and Sonic/--- where the ---s are of similar strength to the villains, but unrelated to the heroes (ignoring any added "rivalry" factor). The more the added characters are SFFed by their partner, the closer the match comes to being a simple Mario vs. Sonic. --- Black Turtle and Zelda always win! |
As
I said, that is a simple naive "tag team" based computation. It
excludes rivalry factor, the marginally declining importance of the
secondary character in each team, the degree of overlap between rivals
on a team, etc. --- www.gamefaqscontests.com www.gamefaqscontests.com/gallery |
This
shouldn't be a surprise, I don't know why a bunch of you are calling
Sonic weak. Sonic is basically Nintendo now, and against Mario he's
going to be SFF'd to hell. That said, he is IMO still the clear favorite
for 7th strongest character we've got (I think he'd be able to take
Mega Man directly), and I hope he gets a contest where he can prove it. --- Tofa7 - LoZ-LoD | Hardcore "Thank you, thank you, no applause necessary, just send money..." |
I might take Missingno over Sonic, honestly --- thelefty for analysis crew 2008 imo -tranny I have a third degree burn in flame-o-nomics -Sir Chris |
Good
show. Rivalries and/or Bowser/Robotnik are making this worse than
Mario/Sonic heads up no doubt, but it seems the question of whether
Sonic would hold up well against Mario or get SFF'd has been answered. --- 2002 Link, 2003 Cloud, 2004 Link, 2005 Link, 2006 Link, 2008 Link, 2010 Link, 2011 Cloud. Link 6, Cloud 2 |
Mario
was never in a position to lose to Mega Man, Sonic, or Samus. He is
simply higher up the Nintendo ladder. A "Nintendo boost" isn't going to
boost Mario from a possible loss to a 60/40 win against another Nintendo
character over the course of one year. Even in 2004, arguably his
weakest year or "era" (I'd say 2003-2004 was Square's strongest point
and, conversely, Mario's weakest), Super Mario World still shredded
Sonic 2, and Mario's games would have done the same to any Sonic game,
Mega Man game, or Metroid game, and it's obvious character matches would
have been nothing more than less violent versions of the same
beatdowns. --- Yoblazer: http://8board.webs.com/ariel.jpg Watch and you'll see... someday I'll be... part of your world! |
Well, it was fun being on the leaderboard while it lasted. Unfortunately, in two more matches my bracket's going to go to hell. --- PSN - Aevio "I'm on a Goomba." - BlackMageJawa |
From: red sox 777 | #026 It was always possible for Sonic to hold up well, but I personally thought he'd end up embarrassed. tbqh, I'm still kinda impressed that Mega Man held Mario to 58% in early 2010. I fully expected the plumber to shoot for 60+, and Mega Man falls in the same camp as Sonic, so maybe Sonic would look a lot better 1v1. --- Yoblazer: http://i32.tinypic.com/zlf1w7.gif Watch and you'll see... someday I'll be... part of your world! |
I
disagree entirely in regard to Samus, at least. Mega Man and Sonic may
not have been strong enough to beat him in 2003-2004 anyway. Well, Sonic
definitely wasn't. But it's very clear that something changed for Mario in 2005. To act like "Well, Mario ALWAYS would have done that, only maybe not as bad" seems to tell me that people forget how bad Mario looked against a lot of bad competition (or how bad he looked against good competition, even). 2001 - http://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/index.html?poll=634 2006 (Before the Series Contest) - http://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/index.html?poll=2328 What changed? Whatever caused the Nintendo Boost affected Mario in a significant way, and I think you're ignoring how significant it is if you think Mario easily beats Samus before 2005 anyway. --- "Why must we always choose between certain death and probable death?" "I'm in an epic battle to the death, FIGURE IT OUT YOURSELF!" |
And
I shouldn't have to even say "Characters =/= Games" when you bring up
what Mario games would've done to Sonic, Mega Man, or Metroid games.
Keep in mind that Mario 3/CT was closer than Crono/Mario that year. --- "Hold on a minute! That testimony stinks!" "Witness! You can't just say 'Hello' and expect us to get anywhere! I want you to testify!" |
Just
because Mario got anti-voted in those early years (seems somewhat
evident that he did) doesn't mean he would have dropped the ball when it
mattered. Remember that he did beat Cloud, beat Crono, and put up a
better performance on Link in 2002 than he did in 2010. He also
obliterated Donkey Kong in 2002 worse than he did Ike and Falco last
year. Mario would have never dropped Nintendo matches to anyone but
Link. 60/40 in 2005 Possible loss in 2004? I mean, you CAN make a purely numerical argument since we actually saw that scenario play out with Sephiroth/Mega Man, but Samus is ANOTHER NINTENDO CHARACTER. It's all SFF bro! --- Yoblazer: http://i33.tinypic.com/ml36gl_th.gif Watch and you'll see... someday I'll be... part of your world! |
I'm
still not entirely convinced rSFF actually exists in any form. We've
never seen a clear cut case of it, and that's definitely what it
would've had to have been. Based on Crono/Mario and Crono/Link in 2004,
Mario was projected to get 35% on Link. And that's before whatever SFF
hammer Link would've hit him with. Samus got 41% on Cloud that same
year. 2004 Mario was weaker than 2002 Mario, so don't give me "He beat
Cloud and he beat Crono." He got slammed by Crono in 2004, and he got
slammed by Sephiroth in 2003. Even if you don't want to talk SFF or rSFF, Mario had to make quite a leap to even get on Samus's level from 2004 to 2005. That was a pretty big gap. And there are no excuses you can make for Mario being underrated in 2004, unless you want to argue Link/Crono SFF or something. --- "I couldn't stand a day without a past or future. I need to live each moment to keep fighting here and now." |
This
match is weird. Sonic (only a fraction of a percent in the U.S. but
still) is doing better everywhere in the world except Canada where Mario
has 76%.... Canada loves Mario? --- Starcraft is my life, so without it I wouldn't exist. - Artosis |
From: LeonhartFour | #033 How can you say that with such confidence? Are you putting that much faith into X-Stat values, or are you just picking and choosing which Mario matches we want to count as legit? Let's see... I'll take his win over Cloud and his 82% on Donkey Kong. I guess you can take the 55% on Shadow, which in turn translates to under 55% on Tidus oh yeaaah. --- Yoblazer: http://oi53.tinypic.com/2hd0dh1.jpg Watch and you'll see... someday I'll be... part of your world! |
And
we've seen throughout the contests that SFF doesn't play out the same
way in every contest. Link quadruples Yoshi in 2004, only gets 70% on
Luigi in 2010. What's stopping Link from quadrupling Luigi last year? --- http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/7760/222bj.jpg |
From: PartOfYourWorld | #035 I'm putting faith in direct results on proven characters. I said NOTHING about Shadow. And what Mario did in 2002 means nothing in regard to 2004 because he went from beating Cloud to getting 60/40'd by Sephiroth the very next year. 35% on Link through Crono or 41% on Cloud. You tell me which is better. And the answer is pretty darn obvious --- "Hold on a minute! That testimony stinks!" "Witness! You can't just say 'Hello' and expect us to get anywhere! I want you to testify!" |
There's a monumental difference between degree of blowout and losing a match you would 60/40 just one year later. --- Yoblazer: http://i43.tinypic.com/25z1non.jpg Watch and you'll see... someday I'll be... part of your world! |
From: PartOfYourWorld | #038 Like Sephiroth/Mega Man! --- "I couldn't stand a day without a past or future. I need to live each moment to keep fighting here and now." |
Well, except Mega Man didn't actually win in 2002. But it proves such a leap is actually possible, and Sephiroth didn't even need SFF to do it. --- http://img.imgcake.com/leonpngpe.png http://img.imgcake.com/squalloweenpngem.png |
I
have never been so close to siding with Ulti about this ridiculous
affair before. I don't even know who you sided with in 2005, but I can
make a reasonable guess that it was Samus. Wanna know the part that
really irks me? From: LeonhartFour | #017 It's like saying we weren't thinking and made a stupid pick and just got bailed out because everyone decided to like Mario and that Samus would have won otherwise. It's a bit insulting. --- Yoblazer: http://oi53.tinypic.com/2hd0dh1.jpg Watch and you'll see... someday I'll be... part of your world! |
I
don't really care about Mario beating Samus in 2005. I don't have a dog
in that fight. I picked Samus, but I was happy to see Mario win because
I don't give a crap about Metroid. From: PartOfYourWorld | #041 Let me ask you something: Would picking Cloud to beat Link in 2003 have been a stupid pick? A vast majority of people on Board 8 would've told you "Yes," because direct results from 2002 told you that Link was WAYYYYYYY above Cloud. I'm not meaning to be insulting, but Mario pickers got something that they clearly didn't bank on happening in 2005, and that's very obvious. Whether Mario wins or not in 2004, I can't say. I never said Samus would win. The only thing I'm calling into question is this mentality that "Well, Mario ALWAYS would've won, no matter what!" I don't see the basis for confidence in that pick except for Mario/Samus 2005, and Mario 2005 is not the same Mario we saw in the previous three contests. --- "The great GF...Bahamut." "...GF? I...? Using my powers...It is you humans...I fear..." |
Back in 2005, I had Mario over Samus in my bracket. --- Luster Soldier --- ~Shield Bearer~ | ~Data Analyst~ Popular at school, but not as cool as BlAcK TuRtLe, Guru Champ! |
From: LeonhartFour | #042 That is insulting. The reason Samus was favored on B8 is because the stats either made the match ambiguous or gave her the edge. The reason Mario backers went with Mario was primarily because they decided to balk at the stats and presumed an actual match between these two Nintendo characters, as loaded with SFF as it was, would be won by the bigger Nintendo guy. That would have never changed regardless of year, but you're saying that this rationale may have been completely wrong in 2002-04 and we essentially got bailed out by a Nintendo boost that helped Mario way more than other Nintendo characters (nevermind that Zelda, Ganon, and Kirby, among others, all started getting beastly near this time). The notion is silly, man. The Nintendo fanbase isn't gonna do a switcheroo like that over the course of one year. Essentially, you're not giving enough credit to people for balking at the stats (in a time where the stats were given immensely more consideration than they are today) and making a risky pick. --- Yoblazer: http://oi53.tinypic.com/2hd0dh1.jpg Watch and you'll see... someday I'll be... part of your world! |
From: PartOfYourWorld | #044 Why not? Apparently something changed because Mario was much stronger than he'd been before. Plus, we had a big influx of new voters between 2004 and 2005 anyway. The site wasn't the same in those two years. There were a lot of new voters for the 2005 contest. a Nintendo boost that helped Mario way more than other Nintendo characters (nevermind that Zelda, Ganon, and Kirby, among others, all started getting beastly near this time) I never said other Nintendo characters were not affected, but Mario characters definitely benefited more than most. Mario characters didn't do that great in 2003 or 2004. Luigi looked weaker than Jill Valentine. Bowser got smoked by Cloud (Cloud got more on Bowser in 2003 than he got on Captain Falcon in 2010). Yoshi got SFF'd as badly as Fox friggin' McCloud. --- http://www.gifsoup.com/view/593815/frasier-and-niles-dance-o.gif |
And
I'm not even sure what's so insulting with saying you got lucky with
some help you didn't count on and couldn't have predicted. Mario may
have won anyway. I have no problem admitting I got lucky in 2007 to get
in position to win prizes because of my stupid Cloud > Link pick
because I wasn't banking on L-Block becoming an internet phenomenon and
getting rallied to victory, thus borking Link > Cloud pickers because
of how stupid the scoring system was. I'll take luck over skill any day. I've made a number of dumb picks that turned out to be right because I got lucky (Getting Sonic > Crono right in 2006 was more because Crono got weaker than Sonic got stronger or was strong enough to win in the first place. I certainly wasn't banking on that. I just took a shot on picking Sonic). That's not to say there's no skill or risk involved. There was definitely a risk involved in picking Mario in 2005 because Samus looked noticeably stronger than Mario in 2004. But Mario/Samus is more questionable in 2004 than it is in 2005 because Mario was much weaker. --- "So cold. I am always by your side." "There ain't no gettin' off of this train we on!" |
Mario>Samus
was a lucky dumb pick, yes. Samus was clearly stronger before 2k5, and
Mario was nowhere near what he is now in terms of putting up high
numbers. He may have won anyway in 2k4, but no one could have predicted
the 2k5 Ninty boost. Maybe it's 'insulting', but I don't really care.
Picking L-Block to win in 2k7 was also a lucky dumb pick, but it won
people contests. --- Black Turtle did a pretty good job. |
From: LeonhartFour | #045 Even those boosts wouldn't have been nearly enough. Squall would have still beaten Luigi comfortably in 2005, and Luigi lost to him by the same percentage that Samus lost to Mario. Squall was also benefited by the biggest Square year ever in 2003, so that performance is potentially inflated in the first place. So you're going from the biggest Square year to the biggest Mario year, and Squall should still win without struggling. It illustrates just how difficult flipping a 60/40 is, especially over the course of one year. I've never had the stupid and trollish "Ulti mindset" about this match, which has since become one of the biggest in contest history. I understand why people took Samus. The stats pointed a bit more in her direction, and she was also strong. I don't give anybody beef for it. Heck, I had Samus in my bracket until the last few days because I didn't want to break away from what those stats were telling me. I'm just saying that the people who went with Mario had a good reason for doing so and weren't bailed out by simple luck. The idea that we just got lucky is irksome. Someone who picked Cloud in 2003 because he likes Cloud more got lucky. Someone who picked Cloud because he anticipated a Kingdom Hearts boost and because he discredited the Cloud/Mario match made an outstanding prediction. --- Yoblazer: http://8board.webs.com/ariel.jpg Watch and you'll see... someday I'll be... part of your world! |
In
pretty much every case, luck is the #1 deciding factor in whether or
not you picked the right entrant. This goes for all matches, not just
Mario/Samus. --- Black Turtle did a pretty good job. |
My
guess is Mario/Samus would have been a lot closer in 2004, but Mario
would have won. It was a lot closer in 2008, with Mario getting 54%.
Samus had every reason to underperform in that match too, being at the
bottom of Triple SFF and with any possible strategic voting by Nintendo
fans going to Mario in a futile attempt to beat Crono. The stats say that Mario 2005 gets 57% on Mario 2004, but that's based on a constant Crono, which I don't buy. Crono was notably stronger in 2004, and I'd say a good chunk of the difference between Mario/Crono 2004 and 2005 was on Crono's end. So Mario 2005 would actually be worth more like 55% on Mario 2004, which isn't as big a difference. I disagreed with EC at the time on this, but now I think he was right on this point: Samus has never been weaker than Mario by any significant amount since Metroid Prime came out. In 2005-7 they were about equals indirectly, and Samus has been stronger in every other year since 2003. So Mario won in 2005 through SFF that turned an even match into a 60/40 beatdown. --- 2002 Link, 2003 Cloud, 2004 Link, 2005 Link, 2006 Link, 2008 Link, 2010 Link, 2011 Cloud. Link 6, Cloud 2 |
