why are people underrating loud?

Yes , they had a bad tourney but the team is still top 6 at champions imo .

who underrated them

there's more people baiting than underating them, don't take this forum as a parameter for anything.

masters 1 was a weird tournament. alot of "fluke" runs.
its so hard to know if a team is generally good with the lack of international tournaments + the changing metas

theyre overrated if anything

capital_d_colon [#4]

masters 1 was a weird tournament. alot of "fluke" runs.
its so hard to know if a team is generally good with the lack of international tournaments + the changing metas

Favourites losing to underdogs = fluke
👍🏻

capital_d_colon [#4]

masters 1 was a weird tournament. alot of "fluke" runs.
its so hard to know if a team is generally good with the lack of international tournaments + the changing metas

Bruh imagine teams working their asses off to reach the finals and win only to be called as fluke by some random vlr users.

dexter000111 [#6]

Favourites losing to underdogs = fluke
👍🏻

zeta top 3
loud top 2

Masters 2
zeta - NA
loud - last place

so what is zeta just losing to underdogs and are actually good

Quagmire [#7]

Bruh imagine teams working their asses off to reach the finals and win only to be called as fluke by some random vlr users.

we literally dont know if runs are flukes or overperformance as there isnt enough tournaments or games

capital_d_colon [#9]

we literally dont know if runs are flukes or overperformance as there isnt enough tournaments or games

there are no fluke runs, a tournament is a tournament and that's it