Let me know what would you change
-
Sen
-
Nrg
-- -
Lev
-
C9
-
Loud
-- -
100T
-
Kru
-
G2
-- -
Furia
-
EG
-
Mibr
3
Current Americas power ranking
posted in
General Discussion
Comments:
Threaded
Linear
I'm rooting for 100t because I think they can be really good, but I'm not really a 100t fan.
Asuna is a lot better than people give him credit for, it's just on some maps the coordination with the team isn't quite there, but like his split against G2 was pretty good.
Boostio's individual performance has kind of been lacking recently, but his igling is still good. Xeppaa does have more experience than eeiu, but eeiu is so much more reliable as a fragger.
Look, LEV has gotten a lot better, but I'm still not convinced LEV is that good. SEN played awful verse them, and tbh NRG doesn't look like they played well against them either.
100t to me, feels like they'll just keep getting better and better. Ofc, as outrageous as this sounds, I'm not going to stick to 100t that much. If they lose again, I'll be happy to drop them lower in an Americas ranking.
I mean 100t is a weird team though, because they locked their roster late, played in a hard group in kickoff, and then only lost to SEN. Obviously, they haven't beaten a really good team, but my belief in 100t is about the same as people calling NRG a superteam when they only beat Furia.
In the end, the only team in Americas that's really proven themselves with their current roster, is SEN. Besides, there is no objective way to rank teams anyway, to be honest.
is this a power ranking or a recency biased ranking
these are two different things
because if we're doing a power ranking c9 are 3rd at minimum and probably 2nd, they're 3-0 and beat lev+loud, and similar goes for kru
if this is a recency bias ranking then dont call it a friggin power ranking, words are not hard lets learn how to use them sometime this year
also if this is a ranking then its still shit lmfao who invited loud to the top 5? they had two weeks off and got absolutely FUCKED, and were not looking remotely good doing it
anyway an actual power ranking goes like:
- NRG
- C9
- LEV
- SEN
- KRU
- 100T
- LOUD
- G2
- EG
- FUR
- MIBR
but if youre doing a pure ranking it looks more like:
- SEN
- NRG
- LEV
- 100T
- C9
- LOUD
- KRU
- G2
- EG
- MIBR
- FUR
How are you saying my power ranking is recency biased when u r putting c9 (who are on a streak --> puts them higher on recent events) on top 2?
Actually one of the most braindead comments I've read in a while.
I'll even refuse to address any other point u made. The bullshit you are spewing is all based on recency and you are pointing my power ranking for being recency biased. Insane comment.
holy shit you actually cant read thats crazy
im saying you dont know what a power ranking is??? "is this a power ranking or a recency bias ranking, two different things"
a power ranking is ranking teams' form
this is why c9 is second
again, learn what words mean sometime this year PLEASE
"youre pointing my power ranking for being recency biased" im saying u dont know what a power ranking is you braindead fuck it literally says it
hopeless
Power ranking isn't necessarily ranking teams based on form. Power ranking = ranking teams based on their Power, which obviously is based on form as well but it's not all of it.
I.e. if the pistons went on a 10 games winning streak and the nuggets on a 5 game losing streak at the end of the season, nuggets should still be well above the pistons, regardless of the recent form.
yeah but its extremely reliant on form, power rankings look significantly different to basic team standings
i dont watch basketball so i cant really access this analogy properly but lets say the league last season was 18 games instead of 9 and loud after going 8-1 won their next 4 and lost their final 5, but still finished 1st, by the end of the season they would be ranked below teams that finished slightly below them in the standings(lets say c9 lost one more game than them and finished 2nd, they would probably be above loud in this example)
its not to the extreme end where kru would ever be above loud but c9 is closer to sen than kru was to loud lol
they are literally on a 3 game winning streak against very strong teams
I mean yeah I agree with what you are saying but I still don't get why you are basically gatekeeping the use of "power rankings".
Power rankings = ranking teams based on their power. That's what I did. You give many meanings to "power" (e.g. their peak, their current form, your expectations), but that's just many power rankings lol.
All the people that commented seemed to understand what I meant. You seem to be the only one to have a problem with it.
your ranking reads more like an actual ranking of team quality adjusted with partiality to recent results
thats not what a power ranking is in my mind and i think the application of the term "power ranking" is just wrong
in a power ranking c9 specifically would be much higher after going 3-0 and beating two theoretically strong teams
but like you have 1 sen 2 nrg which i agree with if youre talking about how good the team is but thats not really what power ranking means
because like for instance, sen lost to lev and nrg havent lost a game yet. if you make a power ranking immediately after that game, sen should not be 1st because they're 1-1 and lost to a team that just took a bad loss(both on paper and in performance lol lev played like ASS against c9 ngl)
ill preface this with i know next to nothing about basketball but im just gonna assume the nuggets are really good(and for this example, im arbitrarily assuming theyre the best in the league) because you used them in your example lol:
if the nuggets lost 5 in a row while being the best in the league, a quality ranking would still put them 1st, and the standings might have them 1st, but a power ranking would not - they would drop several places in a power ranking(or should) off that
that is my issue with your ranking is your ranking is 100x closer to a quality ranking than a power ranking
hope that makes things clear
We just have different definitions of power ranking and I don't think any of us two is necessarily right.. or wrong.
Power rankings simply means ranking based on power. The definition is not unique.
I don't think we need to be so attached to words either. On this site if I see a power ranking I usually see it using my definition, and either way most people (besides you, ig) seem to understand it pretty well
i have just always understood "power ranking" and "team ranking" to be two different things and based on the "power rankings" i see from like mls posts and people reacting to it(and people reacting to different sports pages when they post power rankings) people usually see it similar to how i do and theres the one guy in the instagram comments section that goes "what?? this sucks! X team should be above Y team because of [reason that assumes the post is a team ranking rather than a power ranking]" and then some other guy ratios the comment with "its a power ranking dumbfuck"
the idea about attachment to words is interesting and my response to that as a guy with a useless 80k english degree is that we use language as our vehicle to communicate, and that communication, that language, is built off a collective understanding of assigned meanings to words so we can all understand the same thing when dan tells the waiter he wants the steak medium rare with a side of fries or when janice and dan make plans at the dinner table to go kayaking the following day, because if we dont have that collective understanding dan gets a soup and salad and shows up to the lake to meet janice carrying a bow and arrow
point is that attachment the only thing holding together how we communicate precise information to other people, so when we use those words differently that communication falls apart
this is why we cant communicate effectively to people that dont speak the same language as us, and while that seems really obvious, the actual mechanics of it are that people that speak english have a collective understanding of how to order a medium rare steak with a side of fries, and that understanding is different to the still collective understanding that is held by people who speak spanish, and they both do not share the collective understanding that people who speak tagalog do for how to order the steak
so i think that we kind of do need to be attached to words in that sense, even though those understandings change and evolve between languages over time and in different societies, we still need some attachment to it because otherwise we are effectively all literally speaking different languages
ive written like 10 different papers on this topic this is the only thing i know.
for what its worth i think everyone else reacting to your post is also doing a ranking based on team quality and not a power ranking in their head
like, kru are 2-0, for a power ranking they should realistically be higher than the 7/8 range
but if its just ranking the teams based on how good they are, yeah they're in that spot most likely
fam its a power ranking what is there not to understand about this shit
of course c9 are above sen c9 are literally on a 3 game winning streak
obviously sen would still put c9 in the dirt like dogs, they're the best team in the world rn but c9 are in better form than a team that got 2-0d
"if youre doing a pure ranking it would be sen 1st" lets learn to read sometime this year please!
imo the list is
sen - biggest sample size, won madrid and still look really good, they've lost games so the loss to lev isnt too bad, they bounce back
nrg - this team is americas version of fnatic, a super team on paper and can probably become the best in americas but they did lose to sen and ethan being new to igling, i think theyll reach full potential at champs
c9 - idk if they are this good but they have had a good run so far, if they carry this on they can definetly make a international lan but well see, they are a new team and no one there are really gone to international stage besides xeppaa and vanity but its been a minute
loud - i mean its loud, probably the greatest team oat in americas, they can definetly bounce back from some rough losses, i think qck is there deciding factor, if he plays good they win if he plays ehh they win but he has also played kinda bad often getting duelist diffed
lev - they have aspas and he just carries them, idk bout the rest of the team, if they can improve their team play and not rely on aspas to drop 30 every game they can definetly be top 3
100t - idk they are always a huge let down, but they look to be improving, still think another year of accomplishing nothing
kru - they look decent but they havent versed any good teams so well see
g2 - new franchised team they dont look bad, but idk why the fuck they have icy on duelist when have leaf on the team
mibr - dont look too good rn but in kick off they didnt look bad
eg - look bad rn but again kickoff they didnt look bad, they have potter who has proven to be a great development coach and they still have jawgemo
furia - yeah idek, they're games end to quick to watch
its too early tbh to really know the list, most of these teams havent even play 10 matches this year, some have only played
Lotus is an attack sided map so idk why you're using this as an argument. Even then Aspas had a once in a lifetime series dropping 47 that map which resulted in a 19-17 win, later winning map 2 13-11. The series could've swung either way and Lev didn't "kick" Sen's ass at all bro. It's wild to think that you just hopped off Nrg's meat go ride Lev's meat after they got dominated
Discord