and im not sure how it works but, if each region gets the same amount of spots, isn't that unfair to regions that have much more better teams?
Yeah but otherwise the scenes in na sea and other weaker regions would die out because Eu and china would dominate the scene. Without the same number of spots for each region the only na/ sea teams that would have a shot at making it in would be eg, mvp, or fnatic. There's a blog post on just this subject, you should read it.
invites are based on recent performance
also, http://www.dotabuff.com/blog/2016-06-25-the-mysteries-behind-the-international-invites
good point on not wanting weaker regions to die out. but come on. the money should be enough incentive. people who are willing to work hard for it eventually will deserve it. i hardly think they will just die out. in fact, greater true competition will push other regions to keep up and not just slack off.
@triple look at the NA regional qualifiers. i get the concept that it is based on recent performance... but fuck that? prove ur worth in the qualifiers. there are so many better unknown teams in the open qualifiers, who's to say they don't deserve a spot.
there were no actually strong teams in na open qualifiers, that would desrve a spot in regional ones (sorry, kitrak).
^ yes. But if they are that much better than their opponents they would very unlikely have one bad game against them would they? Only if they face a team
Of equal calibre would their "bad game" have any impact on the outcome. And in that case, whatever team it is that's giving them a hard time deserves a chance. Idiot. Past performance should not mean anything. No it shouldn't. U have to perform at ur best. It's how competition works. Hey u know what. Forget it. Since they won 2 majors lets just crown them winners of TI because they deserve it from past performance. Fucking logic
What I mean triple is that, if some teams in open qualifiers can give EG a harder time than the regional invites, then there is something seriously wrong with the current system eh?
no.
teams do not perform the same over a large period of time, there is a huuuuge deviation. seceret nearly lost to prodota in the first qualifier, but on average secret wins 9 games out of 10 against them, and its a huge lead.
also its not true that a way better teams never loses to the underdogs. top teams never had winrate close to 100%.
Of course there will be deviation. As with all competition your performance depends on so many variables. The best team may not perform in the grand finals and loses. But in all other aspects they "should" be the winner. So if they are the "true" best team and would beat the second best team 9 out of 10 but somehow didn't perform. They should still be allowed to win? Nah. Competition should be about performance
and it is about the performance over the period of time.
the point of major events is to put consistently strongest teams to play against each other, and not rely on who managed to win 1 bo1 match.
i dont see a single point that makes an evaluation of 1 match more consistent than an evaluation over a period of time.
Well I know we are going back and forth between evaluation at a single point in time and evaluation over a period. I think both is valid and should be respected. That's why In the sporting world u have leagues and shit with points like in soccer. Then u have competitions that don't care about that. Etc.
so what is TI supposed to be? Both ? Don't think that works. I never liked the idea of Best of ones for that reason u mentioned. I think it should all be best of threes so some crazy mishap doesn't happen. But Then put every one on equal ground ( with seeding so best teams still face each other ) because that's the way the biggest competition of the year should be. Fair
even with bo1s open quals take insane amount of time, u basically play 12 hrs a day.
teams that should be in regional quals regardless are granted a safe spot there anyways and do not risk to lose a random bo1 to some trash 7k stack. however, even those ones who u underperformed lately, have a chance to play in open qualifiers, which are basically a competition between 7-8 half-decent teams; all the other participants have no real chance to win there, and idr a single major open qualifier that would have been dominated by an underdog team.
keep in mind that semi finals and finals are bo3 as well, and by that point there is 1 underdog team left max, in most cases all the 4 are decent.
Please sign in to post comments.
IMO, fuck them. They are controversial, subjective, and create imbalance. just let every1 go through open qualifiers. fuck invites. give the teams on the ground a real chance. only those deserving should have a spot.