potential groups for champions

THIS IS ALL HYPOTHETICAL BTW

if groups are made by drawing from 4 pools, here's an idea of what the groups could look like

i think it's possible that as the Berlin winner, Gambit could be considered "EMEA #1" and as a result, Acend and Fnatic could be considered EMEA #2 and #3, respectively, which is why I have Acend in Pool B despite being the "#1" seed from EMEA

Pool A (#1 seed from regions that have 2 slots, minus EMEA since the Berlin winner is from EMEA):
Berlin Winner (Gambit Esports)
NA #1 (Sentinels)
BR #1 (Team Vikings)
SEA #1 (X10 Esports)

Pool B (#1 seed from regions that have 1 slot, plus EMEA #1 since they were excluded from Pool A):
EMEA #1 (Acend)
KR #1 (Vision Strikers)
JP #1 (Crazy Raccoon)
LATAM #1 (KRÜ Esports)

Pool C (remaining #2 seeds):
EMEA #2 (Fnatic)
NA #2 (Envy)
BR #2 (Keyd Stars)
SEA #2 (Team Secret)

Pool D (LCQ Winners):
EMEA LCQ (Team Liquid)
NA LCQ (Cloud9 Blue)
SA LCQ (FURIA)
APAC LCQ (FULL SENSE)

each group would consist of 1 team from each pool, with no group consisting of more than one team per region

here's an idea of potential groups:

Group A:
Berlin Winner (Gambit Esports)
LATAM #1 (KRÜ Esports)
NA #2 (Envy)
APAC LCQ (FULL SENSE)

Group B:
NA #1 (Sentinels)
JP #1 (Crazy Raccoon)
EMEA #2 (Fnatic)
SA LCQ (FURIA)

Group C:
BR #1 (Team Vikings)
EMEA #1 (Acend)
SEA #2 (Team Secret)
NA LCQ (Cloud9 Blue)

Group D:
SEA #1 (X10 Esports)
KR #1 (Vision Strikers)
BR #2 (Keyd Stars)
EMEA LCQ (Team Liquid)

Edit: some clarification about why I pushed down EMEA #1 to Pool B despite being a top region: I'm not trying to "punish" Acend for EMEA winning Berlin; my reasoning is that if Gambit HADN'T won, they would have been EMEA #1 and Acend would have been EMEA #2. as a result, since EMEA earned an "extra" slot from Berlin, I'm considering Gambit as EMEA #1, Acend as EMEA #2, and Fnatic as EMEA #3, and seeded them accordingly (Gambit in Pool A, Acend in Pool B, Fnatic in Pool C). I also do agree that KR is stronger than BR and SEA, but since BR and SEA have 2 seeds while KR only has 1, I think it's likely that KR will be put in the same pool as other regions with only 1 seed (LATAM and JP), while BR #1 and SEA #1 will be put in Pool A since they are from regions with 2 seeds.

I personally think that Riot will wait until VCT 2021 is over to factor regional performance into their decision-making for future international events, and I very well could be wrong, but we'll see what happens!

I want to emphasize that this seeding is not based on the strength of individual teams, but rather just based on regional allocations of slots; for example, if I did it based on past performance, I would have Pool A consist of Gambit, Sentinels, Acend, and Envy (Envy getting a higher pool placement due to strong performance at Berlin)

acend will be emea #1
so gambit can be drawn into an emea grp

if this situation (WHICH AGAIN IS COMPLETELY HYPOTHETICAL) were to happen, my picks to make it out of groups would be Gambit (A), Envy (A), Sentinels (B), FURIA (B), Acend (C), Team Secret (C), Vision Strikers (D), and Team Liquid (D)

ritdro2211 [#2]

acend will be emea #1
so gambit can be drawn into an emea grp

since there's 4 EMEA teams and Gambit would've likely been EMEA #1 if they hadn't won Berlin (I think?) it's possible that they'll push Acend and Fnatic down a pool since they are technically the second and third teams from their region

tttangent [#4]

since there's 4 EMEA teams and Gambit would've likely been EMEA #1 if they hadn't won Berlin (I think?) it's possible that they'll push Acend and Fnatic down a pool since they are technically the second and third teams from their region

No man idts as berlin winner is a seperate slot
So they take it as a neutral

Your pool seedings are kinda off
It will be similar to masters 2

Wtf
SEA#1 is in Pool 1
While KR#1 and EMEA#1 is in pool 2.
Hopium overdose damaging your brain kids.

DELUSIONAL_FANS_DESTROYER [#7]

Wtf
SEA#1 is in Pool 1
While KR#1 and EMEA#1 is in pool 2.
Hopium overdose damaging your brain kids.

riot gave SEA 2 spots and KR 1 spot, why would they consider KR "better" than SEA??

tttangent [#8]

riot gave SEA 2 spots and KR 1 spot, why would they consider KR "better" than SEA??

because they perform better in international tournaments

doesnt make sense that acend get punished because gambit won masters

DELUSIONAL_FANS_DESTROYER [#7]

Wtf
SEA#1 is in Pool 1
While KR#1 and EMEA#1 is in pool 2.
Hopium overdose damaging your brain kids.

and if you actually read my post, I explained why I put EMEA #1 in the second pool; since Gambit won Berlin, it will likely be considered the "first seed" from EMEA, pushing Acend and Fnatic down to being considered as 2nd and 3rd seeds

this makes sense because if Gambit had lost to Envy, Gambit would've been EMEA #1 and Acend would've been EMEA #2,

btw, if Envy had won Berlin, I would've done the same thing with the NA teams: I would've had Envy in pool A as the Berlin winner, Sentinels in pool B, 100T in pool C, and the NA LCQ winner in pool D

Mkin11 [#9]

because they perform better in international tournaments

then why does SEA have 2 spots and KR only has 1?

thanatos11 [#11]

doesnt make sense that acend get punished because gambit won masters

how are acend getting punished? if gambit hadn't won masters, acend would've been EMEA #2 and would've been in pool C instead of pool B

i'm not sure why you think getting moved up from pool C to pool B is a "punishment"

Personally, I'd rather see Riot do pools like this since it makes sure we get actual international play (unlike putting SMB and ACE in the same group)

Pool A:
Master’s 3 Winner
EMEA 1
EMEA 2
EMEA LCQ

Pool B:
NA 1
KR 1
NA 2
NA LCQ

Pool C:
BR 1
LATAM 1
BR 2
SA LCQ

Pool D:
SEA 1
JP 1
SEA 2
APAC LCQ

ritdro2211 [#5]

No man idts as berlin winner is a seperate slot
So they take it as a neutral

possibly, but I think this is more likely

again it's just a hypothetical

tttangent [#13]

then why does SEA have 2 spots and KR only has 1?

To increase viewership in that region. Also you are in no position to be deciding seeding if you don't even know how well team's place in international tourneys.

EMEA 1 prob in group 1 instead of 2 replacing SEA or BR

Sprouts [#15]

Personally, I'd rather see Riot do pools like this since it makes sure we get actual international play (unlike putting SMB and ACE in the same group)

Pool A:
Master’s 3 Winner
EMEA 1
EMEA 2
EMEA LCQ

Pool B:
NA 1
KR 1
NA 2
NA LCQ

Pool C:
BR 1
LATAM 1
BR 2
SA LCQ

Pool D:
SEA 1
JP 1
SEA 2
APAC LCQ

assuming that groups would have one team from each pool, this could lead to some really unbalanced groups

for example you could have stronger groups with 4 #1 seeds, or weaker groups with multiple LCQ winners

wedqatwrtgehge [#18]

EMEA 1 prob in group 1 instead of 2 replacing SEA or BR

possibly, my reasoning was that since Gambit won Berlin, they would be considered the "first seed" from EMEA, while EMEA #1 would be the "second seed" and EMEA #2 would be the "third seed"

tttangent [#19]

assuming that groups would have one team from each pool, this could lead to some really unbalanced groups

for example you could have stronger groups with 4 #1 seeds, or weaker groups with multiple LCQ winners

True, but you could assign seeds 1-4 for each group

examples:

Pool A:
Master's 3 Winner - 1
EMEA 1 - 2
EMEA 2 - 3
EMEA LCQ - 4

Pool B:
NA 1 - 1
KR 1 - 2
NA 2 - 3
NA LCQ - 4

Groups would then only have one of each seed
Pools make it so we don't get something like NA vs NA and seeds make it so we don't get something like Master's 3 Winner vs NA 1

Su-metal [#17]

To increase viewership in that region. Also you are in no position to be deciding seeding if you don't even know how well team's place in international tourneys.

i do know how well they've been placing, and yes KR did better than SEA at Berlin but is it really fair to punish SEA because of visa issues? F4Q got a "9-12th" finish despite playing miserably and Bren (now Secret) got a 13-16th finish because of visa issues out of their control

F4Q did nothing to earn their 9-12th finish and there's a very reasonable chance they would've ended up 13-16th if not for Bren's visa issues

tttangent [#14]

how are acend getting punished? if gambit hadn't won masters, acend would've been EMEA #2 and would've been in pool C instead of pool B

i'm not sure why you think getting moved up from pool C to pool B is a "punishment"

they wouldve been in Pool B if gambit had lost the final but its unfair to give sentinels a higher seeding just because europe won

Sprouts [#21]

True, but you could assign seeds 1-4 for each group

examples:

Pool A:
Master's 3 Winner - 1
EMEA 1 - 2
EMEA 2 - 3
EMEA LCQ - 4

Pool B:
NA 1 - 1
KR 1 - 2
NA 2 - 3
NA LCQ - 4

Groups would then only have one of each seed
Pools make it so we don't get something like NA vs NA and seeds make it so we don't get something like Master's 3 Winner vs NA 1

in that case, this actually ends up functioning almost the exact same as my proposed idea if you think about it!

my Pool A consists of the #1 seeds from your pools, my Pool B consists of the #2 seeds from your pools, etc.

Sprouts [#21]

True, but you could assign seeds 1-4 for each group

examples:

Pool A:
Master's 3 Winner - 1
EMEA 1 - 2
EMEA 2 - 3
EMEA LCQ - 4

Pool B:
NA 1 - 1
KR 1 - 2
NA 2 - 3
NA LCQ - 4

Groups would then only have one of each seed
Pools make it so we don't get something like NA vs NA and seeds make it so we don't get something like Master's 3 Winner vs NA 1

Pools make it so we don't get something like NA vs NA and seeds make it so we don't get something like Master's 3 Winner vs NA 1

while my idea doesn't exactly have that, I did specify that groups couldn't have more than one team per region to avoid NA vs NA, EMEA vs EMEA, etc.

Sprouts [#21]

True, but you could assign seeds 1-4 for each group

examples:

Pool A:
Master's 3 Winner - 1
EMEA 1 - 2
EMEA 2 - 3
EMEA LCQ - 4

Pool B:
NA 1 - 1
KR 1 - 2
NA 2 - 3
NA LCQ - 4

Groups would then only have one of each seed
Pools make it so we don't get something like NA vs NA and seeds make it so we don't get something like Master's 3 Winner vs NA 1

in fact, the potential groups I proposed would actually be a possible drawing under your format as well

thanatos11 [#23]

they wouldve been in Pool B if gambit had lost the final but its unfair to give sentinels a higher seeding just because europe won

i don't think so, it's likely that acend, as a #2 seed, would've been in pool C since they probably wouldn't be put above #1 seeds from smaller regions (KR, JP, LATAM)

and i don't see how you think i'm giving sentinels a higher seeding?

tttangent [#22]

i do know how well they've been placing, and yes KR did better than SEA at Berlin but is it really fair to punish SEA because of visa issues? F4Q got a "9-12th" finish despite playing miserably and Bren (now Secret) got a 13-16th finish because of visa issues out of their control

F4Q did nothing to earn their 9-12th finish and there's a very reasonable chance they would've ended up 13-16th if not for Bren's visa issues

Yea I agree F4Q were garbage and Secret were unlucky because they could have placed higher. However Secret would never have made it out of the groups with Sen and G2 in it and Paper Rex also got last in theirs, while Vision Strikers made it to the Quarters (probably higher if they did not play Gambit the eventual winners). Flashback to Berlin and we see X10 get wrecked in the lower bracket second round, while Nuturn got 3rd in the whole tournament. I don't disagree with your seeding because I genuinely think it's pretty fair, other than SEA 1 being rated so highly, but I definitely disagree with your point that Korea is not better than SEA.

Su-metal [#28]

Yea I agree F4Q were garbage and Secret were unlucky because they could have placed higher. However Secret would never have made it out of the groups with Sen and G2 in it and Paper Rex also got last in theirs, while Vision Strikers made it to the Quarters (probably higher if they did not play Gambit the eventual winners). Flashback to Berlin and we see X10 get wrecked in the lower bracket second round, while Nuturn got 3rd in the whole tournament. I don't disagree with your seeding because I genuinely think it's pretty fair, other than SEA 1 being rated so highly, but I definitely disagree with your point that Korea is not better than SEA.

oh I definitely think KR is better than SEA, but for the purpose of seeding it doesn't make sense for riot to give SEA 2 spots and KR 1 spot, and then turn around and give KR a higher seeding than SEA's #1 seed

Sprouts [#15]

Personally, I'd rather see Riot do pools like this since it makes sure we get actual international play (unlike putting SMB and ACE in the same group)

Pool A:
Master’s 3 Winner
EMEA 1
EMEA 2
EMEA LCQ

Pool B:
NA 1
KR 1
NA 2
NA LCQ

Pool C:
BR 1
LATAM 1
BR 2
SA LCQ

Pool D:
SEA 1
JP 1
SEA 2
APAC LCQ

Wtf, this is worst

cheaterr [#30]

Wtf, this is worst

You know pools and groups aren’t the same thing, right?

Why is BR #1 (Team Vikings) and SEA #1 (X10 Esports) in Pool A while EMEA #1 (Acend) and KR #1 (Vision Strikers) in Pool B?

Vortexy [#32]

Why is BR #1 (Team Vikings) and SEA #1 (X10 Esports) in Pool A while EMEA #1 (Acend) and KR #1 (Vision Strikers) in Pool B?

i'm considering EMEA #1 as EMEA's "second seed" since an EMEA team won Berlin, which is why I have them in pool B

i have BR #1 and SEA #1 above KR #1 because BR and SEA have 2 spots, while KR only has 1, which likely means that riot considers them "stronger regions", even though i do personally think that VS is (significantly) better than both X10 and VKS

Sprouts [#15]

Personally, I'd rather see Riot do pools like this since it makes sure we get actual international play (unlike putting SMB and ACE in the same group)

Pool A:
Master’s 3 Winner
EMEA 1
EMEA 2
EMEA LCQ

Pool B:
NA 1
KR 1
NA 2
NA LCQ

Pool C:
BR 1
LATAM 1
BR 2
SA LCQ

Pool D:
SEA 1
JP 1
SEA 2
APAC LCQ

eh... I generally agree with you Sprouts but not on this one.

With your pools, there could theoretically be a group with Gambit/EMEA#1, KR#1/NA#1, BR#1/LATAM#1, and SEA#1/JP#1 while another group has EMEA#2/LCQ, NA#2/LCQ, BR#2/LCQ, and SEA#2/LCQ.

tttangent [#12]

and if you actually read my post, I explained why I put EMEA #1 in the second pool; since Gambit won Berlin, it will likely be considered the "first seed" from EMEA, pushing Acend and Fnatic down to being considered as 2nd and 3rd seeds

this makes sense because if Gambit had lost to Envy, Gambit would've been EMEA #1 and Acend would've been EMEA #2,

btw, if Envy had won Berlin, I would've done the same thing with the NA teams: I would've had Envy in pool A as the Berlin winner, Sentinels in pool B, 100T in pool C, and the NA LCQ winner in pool D

Riot doesn't care about where the Berlin winner come from.
You should learn a little from Berlin placement.

tttangent [#13]

then why does SEA have 2 spots and KR only has 1?

Because KR is 1 country, and SEA consist of many2 country? Duh,

tttangent [#33]

i'm considering EMEA #1 as EMEA's "second seed" since an EMEA team won Berlin, which is why I have them in pool B

i have BR #1 and SEA #1 above KR #1 because BR and SEA have 2 spots, while KR only has 1, which likely means that riot considers them "stronger regions", even though i do personally think that VS is (significantly) better than both X10 and VKS

I would personally consider Gambit as simply the "Master's 3 winners" and not use them to justify EMEA#1 as a "second seed" and thus put them in a worse pool.

Also, I would organize the pools with how strong a team seems to be rather than the amount of slots they get. Brazil's consistently poor performance so far are enough in my opinion to justify not considering them as top teams and not put them in top pools at the same levels with Gambit, EMEA#1, NA#1, and KR#1.

Again, I disagree with a few aspects of your pool, but I see your point.

tttangent [#27]

i don't think so, it's likely that acend, as a #2 seed, would've been in pool C since they probably wouldn't be put above #1 seeds from smaller regions (KR, JP, LATAM)

and i don't see how you think i'm giving sentinels a higher seeding?

Doesn’t make sense that NA #1 gets seed 1 meanwhile EU #1 gets seed 2

I think the pools will be decided by berlin results:

Pool 1: Berlin winner, NA 1, NA 2, EMEA 1
Pool 2: EMEA 2, KR , LATAM, JP
Pool3: BR 1, BR2, SEA 1, SEA 2
Pool 4: LCQ

you can swap JP and BR 1 since they both finish 9-12 at berlin

so the pools would be:

Pool 1: Gambit, Sentinels, Envy, Acend
Pool 2: Fnatic, Vision strikers, Kru, Crazy racoon
Pool 3: Vikings, Vivo Keyd, X10, Team secret
Pool 4: Cloud9, Liquid, Furia, Full sense

Mkin11 [#39]

I think the pools will be decided by berlin results:

Pool 1: Berlin winner, NA 1, NA 2, EMEA 1
Pool 2: EMEA 2, KR , LATAM, JP
Pool3: BR 1, BR2, SEA 1, SEA 2
Pool 4: LCQ

you can swap JP and BR 1 since they both finish 9-12 at berlin

so the pools would be:

Pool 1: Gambit, Sentinels, Envy, Acend
Pool 2: Fnatic, Vision strikers, Kru, Crazy racoon
Pool 3: Vikings, Vivo Keyd, X10, Team secret
Pool 4: Cloud9, Liquid, Furia, Full sense

Vision Strikers destroyed Acend?

Vortexy [#40]

Vision Strikers destroyed Acend?

results as a region I mean to say

Mkin11 [#41]

results as a region I mean to say

Why is Kru in pool 2?? You're seriously saying they're the same level as VS?

Vortexy [#42]

Why is Kru in pool 2?? You're seriously saying they're the same level as VS?

because they finish in 4- 8th position in Berlin same as Vision strikers

Vortexy [#42]

Why is Kru in pool 2?? You're seriously saying they're the same level as VS?

this method of making the pools is only taking into account the regions placement in Berlin, it does not take into account the subjective perception one has of which team is stronger

Mkin11 [#41]

results as a region I mean to say

also wtf do you even mean results as a region?

If you're taking the results of region by region (which makes no sense since there are stronger and weaker teams within each region) then all the teams from one region should be in the same pool since their region as a whole technically got the same result.

If team A got first place and team B from the same region got 16th/last place, both teams should be in the same pool somewhere around the 8th place/average mark, not scattered around in different pools since according to your logic, the whole region should be considered at one equal level.

Mkin11 [#43]

because they finish in 4- 8th position in Berlin same as Vision strikers

VS were arguably the 2nd best team at Berlin according to numbers, it was unfortunate for them that they had to face Gambit in the quarterfinals and being the only team after groups to even bring it competitive and take a map off them. If Kru was facing gambit... lulz. Kru is nowhere close to being that good.

Mkin11 [#44]

this method of making the pools is only taking into account the regions placement in Berlin, it does not take into account the subjective perception one has of which team is stronger

not really "subjective perception". At this point its practically fact that Latam and Brazil are not that good at Valorant (no offense, but just look at past history and results) while regions like NA and EMEA are stronger. I don't think there's much "subjective perception" and room for argument there.

Envy blessed once again
Ffs

Vortexy [#46]

VS were arguably the 2nd best team at Berlin according to numbers, it was unfortunate for them that they had to face Gambit in the quarterfinals and being the only team after groups to even bring it competitive and take a map off them. If Kru was facing gambit... lulz. Kru is nowhere close to being that good.

brother, I never said that Kru is in the same level or better or worse. I am just stating that the got the same placement thus they are in the same pool. Why u feeling so insecure that you have the need to diminish a team that has never played against VS.

Mkin11 [#49]

brother, I never said that Kru is in the same level or better or worse. I am just stating that the got the same placement thus they are in the same pool. Why u feeling so insecure that you have the need to diminish a team that has never played against VS.

brother, I'm simply pointing out how your pool is utter dogwater :) and how some teams that easily defeated other teams are ranked lower than the teams they beat.

Vortexy [#50]

brother, I'm simply pointing out how your pool is utter dogwater :) and how some teams that easily defeated other teams are ranked lower than the teams they beat.

we will see when the actual pools come out

Mkin11 [#51]

we will see when the actual pools come out

also I'm waiting for your response to #45

Vortexy [#47]

not really "subjective perception". At this point its practically fact that Latam and Brazil are not that good at Valorant (no offense, but just look at past history and results) while regions like NA and EMEA are stronger. I don't think there's much "subjective perception" and room for argument there.

yeah NA and EMEA are stronger regions, but from history and results Latam (Kru) are the 4th region coming behind Korea.

Mkin11 [#53]

yeah NA and EMEA are stronger regions, but from history and results Latam (Kru) are the 4th region coming behind Korea.

remember iceland? Kru 7-8, Nuturn 3rd.

"from history and results" as you say

Vortexy [#54]

remember iceland? Kru 7-8, Nuturn 3rd.

"from history and results" as you say

well if you cant read then continuing this is pointless

Mkin11 [#55]

well if you cant read then continuing this is pointless

bringing up "history and results" as you said yourself

still waiting for your answer to #45

Vortexy [#56]

bringing up "history and results" as you said yourself

still waiting for your answer to #45

NA and EMEA are the best regions, then comes Korea as 3rd then latam as 4th. When doing the pools one must select a criteria for which to make the pools I choose berlin placements. Subejctive perspective is a term I used meant to depict the bias one can have if you dont select a concrete criteria.

Mkin11 [#57]

NA and EMEA are the best regions, then comes Korea as 3rd then latam as 4th. When doing the pools one must select a criteria for which to make the pools I choose berlin placements. Subejctive perspective is a term I used meant to depict the bias one can have if you dont select a concrete criteria.

Problem is, your criteria isn't concrete. You seem to have some issue with responding to #45 too. When I said Vision Strikers destroyed Acend but you put Acend in a better pool than a team they lost to, you said that you were basing it off regions and the overall performance of each region. Yet for some reason you have teams from the same region scattered around in different groups which is contradicting your claim of taking "results of a region" as a whole.

Pool 1:

• Gambit (Masters 3 Champ)
• Sentinels (NA #1)
• Acend (EMEA #1)
• Vision Strikers (KR #1)
  Pool 2:
• KRU (LATAM #1)
• Vikings (BR #1)
• X10 Esports (SEA #1)
• Envy (NA #2)
  Pool 3:
• Vivo Keyd (BR #2)
• Fnatic (EMEA #2)
• Crazy Raccoon (JP #1)
• Team Secret (SEA #2)
  Pool 4 (Last Chance):
• Team Liquid (EMEA LC)
• C9 Blue (NA LC)
• FURIA (SA LC)
• FULL SENSE (APAC LC)

EMEA has 2 pool 1 teams only because Gambit won Berlin. I think it makes sense to give Master 3 champion a pool 1 slot separate from EMEA/NA.
Vision Strikers over other regions in pool 1 since Korea has the third best results internationally.
Envy over Fnatic in pool 2 since Envy has the better recent performance.

Vortexy [#58]

Problem is, your criteria isn't concrete. You seem to have some issue with responding to #45 too. When I said Vision Strikers destroyed Acend but you put Acend in a better pool than a team they lost to, you said that you were basing it off regions and the overall performance of each region. Yet for some reason you have teams from the same region scattered around in different groups which is contradicting your claim of taking "results of a region" as a whole.

Acend is in pool one beacuse they are EMEA seed 1. "you said that you were basing it off regions and the overall performance of each region. Yet for some reason you have teams from the same region scattered around in different groups which is contradicting your claim of taking "results of a region" as a whole." I already clarify to you that the criteria was Berlin placements, it was a poor choice of words to say results.

ForumPeasant [#59]

Pool 1:

• Gambit (Masters 3 Champ)
• Sentinels (NA #1)
• Acend (EMEA #1)
• Vision Strikers (KR #1)
  Pool 2:
• KRU (LATAM #1)
• Vikings (BR #1)
• X10 Esports (SEA #1)
• Envy (NA #2)
  Pool 3:
• Vivo Keyd (BR #2)
• Fnatic (EMEA #2)
• Crazy Raccoon (JP #1)
• Team Secret (SEA #2)
  Pool 4 (Last Chance):
• Team Liquid (EMEA LC)
• C9 Blue (NA LC)
• FURIA (SA LC)
• FULL SENSE (APAC LC)

EMEA has 2 pool 1 teams only because Gambit won Berlin. I think it makes sense to give Master 3 champion a pool 1 slot separate from EMEA/NA.
Vision Strikers over other regions in pool 1 since Korea has the third best results internationally.
Envy over Fnatic in pool 2 since Envy has the better recent performance.

Best one so far

In my opinion

ForumPeasant [#59]

Pool 1:

• Gambit (Masters 3 Champ)
• Sentinels (NA #1)
• Acend (EMEA #1)
• Vision Strikers (KR #1)
  Pool 2:
• KRU (LATAM #1)
• Vikings (BR #1)
• X10 Esports (SEA #1)
• Envy (NA #2)
  Pool 3:
• Vivo Keyd (BR #2)
• Fnatic (EMEA #2)
• Crazy Raccoon (JP #1)
• Team Secret (SEA #2)
  Pool 4 (Last Chance):
• Team Liquid (EMEA LC)
• C9 Blue (NA LC)
• FURIA (SA LC)
• FULL SENSE (APAC LC)

EMEA has 2 pool 1 teams only because Gambit won Berlin. I think it makes sense to give Master 3 champion a pool 1 slot separate from EMEA/NA.
Vision Strikers over other regions in pool 1 since Korea has the third best results internationally.
Envy over Fnatic in pool 2 since Envy has the better recent performance.

👏👏👏

Mkin11 [#60]

Acend is in pool one beacuse they are EMEA seed 1. "you said that you were basing it off regions and the overall performance of each region. Yet for some reason you have teams from the same region scattered around in different groups which is contradicting your claim of taking "results of a region" as a whole." I already clarify to you that the criteria was Berlin placements, it was a poor choice of words to say results.

OK. Criteria off Berlin placements, even though you brought up this taking region as a whole logic. But in that case why is Acend in a better pool than Vision Strikers? (even disregarding the fact that VS creamed them) Did they not both achieve the same results at Berlin if we are taking only Berlin placements as criteria?

Vortexy [#37]

I would personally consider Gambit as simply the "Master's 3 winners" and not use them to justify EMEA#1 as a "second seed" and thus put them in a worse pool.

Also, I would organize the pools with how strong a team seems to be rather than the amount of slots they get. Brazil's consistently poor performance so far are enough in my opinion to justify not considering them as top teams and not put them in top pools at the same levels with Gambit, EMEA#1, NA#1, and KR#1.

Again, I disagree with a few aspects of your pool, but I see your point.

the idea behind putting EMEA #1 in a "worse pool" is that while Acend is EMEA's #1 seed, they would be ranked as the "second best" team from EMEA; consider that if Gambit had lost to Envy, Gambit would've been EMEA #1 while Acend would've been EMEA #2

and I do agree with your second point, but my guess is that Riot will wait until after VCT 2021 ends to make considerations like that about regions

let's see what happens!

ForumPeasant [#59]

Pool 1:

• Gambit (Masters 3 Champ)
• Sentinels (NA #1)
• Acend (EMEA #1)
• Vision Strikers (KR #1)
  Pool 2:
• KRU (LATAM #1)
• Vikings (BR #1)
• X10 Esports (SEA #1)
• Envy (NA #2)
  Pool 3:
• Vivo Keyd (BR #2)
• Fnatic (EMEA #2)
• Crazy Raccoon (JP #1)
• Team Secret (SEA #2)
  Pool 4 (Last Chance):
• Team Liquid (EMEA LC)
• C9 Blue (NA LC)
• FURIA (SA LC)
• FULL SENSE (APAC LC)

EMEA has 2 pool 1 teams only because Gambit won Berlin. I think it makes sense to give Master 3 champion a pool 1 slot separate from EMEA/NA.
Vision Strikers over other regions in pool 1 since Korea has the third best results internationally.
Envy over Fnatic in pool 2 since Envy has the better recent performance.

i honestly like your pool selection better than mine in terms of actual balancing, I'm just not sure if Riot will actually make considerations/reallocations based on region strength until after VCT 2021 ends, which is why I didn't take past performance into account.

let's see what happens!

ForumPeasant [#59]

Pool 1:

• Gambit (Masters 3 Champ)
• Sentinels (NA #1)
• Acend (EMEA #1)
• Vision Strikers (KR #1)
  Pool 2:
• KRU (LATAM #1)
• Vikings (BR #1)
• X10 Esports (SEA #1)
• Envy (NA #2)
  Pool 3:
• Vivo Keyd (BR #2)
• Fnatic (EMEA #2)
• Crazy Raccoon (JP #1)
• Team Secret (SEA #2)
  Pool 4 (Last Chance):
• Team Liquid (EMEA LC)
• C9 Blue (NA LC)
• FURIA (SA LC)
• FULL SENSE (APAC LC)

EMEA has 2 pool 1 teams only because Gambit won Berlin. I think it makes sense to give Master 3 champion a pool 1 slot separate from EMEA/NA.
Vision Strikers over other regions in pool 1 since Korea has the third best results internationally.
Envy over Fnatic in pool 2 since Envy has the better recent performance.

This is actually pretty balanced

But I feel like JP#1 should be pool 2 in place of NA#2. I know Crazy raccoons haven't performed well at international stage but neither have X10 and Vikings.
It's just my opinion that CR should be pool 2.
Everything else is perfectly balanced though

Vortexy [#63]

OK. Criteria off Berlin placements, even though you brought up this taking region as a whole logic. But in that case why is Acend in a better pool than Vision Strikers? (even disregarding the fact that VS creamed them) Did they not both achieve the same results at Berlin if we are taking only Berlin placements as criteria?

placements in berlin
1st: Gambit ( berlin winner)
2nd: Envy ( NA )
3rd - 4th: 100t ( NA )
3rd- 4th : G2 ( EMEA )
5th-8th: VS ( KR)
5th-8th: Sentinels (NA)
5th-8th: Acend (EMEA)
5th-8th: Kru (LATAM)
9th-12th : Vivo Keyd ( BR)
9th-12th : CR ( JP)
9th-12th : SMB ( EMEA)
9th-12th : F4Q ( KR)
13th- 16th: Paper rex ( SEA)
13th- 16th: Zeta division ( JP )
13th- 16th: Havan liberty ( BR)
13th- 16th: Bren (SEA)

since the lcq teams must be 4th pool because they gained their ticket to champions outside of circuit points

pool 1 ( Berlin, NA 1, NA 2, EMEA 1) ACEND IS EMEA 1 BY CIRCUIT POINTS, SENTINELS IS NA1 , ENVY IS NA2
pool 2 ( KR, EMEA 2, LATAM, JP) ------- No NA 3 so it goes to next one available, you can change JP with BR 1 if you wish
pool 3 ( BR 1, SEA1, BR 2, SEA 2) ------- No EMEA 3, No KR 2, no JP 2
pool 4 ( LCQ)

Sprouts [#31]

You know pools and groups aren’t the same thing, right?

yes

ForumPeasant [#59]

Pool 1:

• Gambit (Masters 3 Champ)
• Sentinels (NA #1)
• Acend (EMEA #1)
• Vision Strikers (KR #1)
  Pool 2:
• KRU (LATAM #1)
• Vikings (BR #1)
• X10 Esports (SEA #1)
• Envy (NA #2)
  Pool 3:
• Vivo Keyd (BR #2)
• Fnatic (EMEA #2)
• Crazy Raccoon (JP #1)
• Team Secret (SEA #2)
  Pool 4 (Last Chance):
• Team Liquid (EMEA LC)
• C9 Blue (NA LC)
• FURIA (SA LC)
• FULL SENSE (APAC LC)

EMEA has 2 pool 1 teams only because Gambit won Berlin. I think it makes sense to give Master 3 champion a pool 1 slot separate from EMEA/NA.
Vision Strikers over other regions in pool 1 since Korea has the third best results internationally.
Envy over Fnatic in pool 2 since Envy has the better recent performance.

Group A:

Gambit
X10
Vivo Keyd
Cloud 9

Group B:

Sentinels
Vikings
Crazy Raccoon
Team Liquid

Group C:

Acend
Envy
Team Secret
Furia

Group D:

Vision Strikers
KRU
Fnatic
Full Sense

tttangent [#3]

if this situation (WHICH AGAIN IS COMPLETELY HYPOTHETICAL) were to happen, my picks to make it out of groups would be Gambit (A), Envy (A), Sentinels (B), FURIA (B), Acend (C), Team Secret (C), Vision Strikers (D), and Team Liquid (D)

furia > fnatic KEKW

Great groups. But I don't think it isn't accurate because it is way to balanced for Riot. Riot will put VS, Gambit, Acend, and Envy into the same group and call it good.

Styx [#70]

furia > fnatic KEKW

what has Fnatic done recently besides fail to qualify for EMEA Challenger Playoffs

thanatos11 [#38]

Doesn’t make sense that NA #1 gets seed 1 meanwhile EU #1 gets seed 2

you've completely ignored what i've repeatedly said so i'm going to stop trying to explain it to you

Mkin11 [#67]

placements in berlin
1st: Gambit ( berlin winner)
2nd: Envy ( NA )
3rd - 4th: 100t ( NA )
3rd- 4th : G2 ( EMEA )
5th-8th: VS ( KR)
5th-8th: Sentinels (NA)
5th-8th: Acend (EMEA)
5th-8th: Kru (LATAM)
9th-12th : Vivo Keyd ( BR)
9th-12th : CR ( JP)
9th-12th : SMB ( EMEA)
9th-12th : F4Q ( KR)
13th- 16th: Paper rex ( SEA)
13th- 16th: Zeta division ( JP )
13th- 16th: Havan liberty ( BR)
13th- 16th: Bren (SEA)

since the lcq teams must be 4th pool because they gained their ticket to champions outside of circuit points

pool 1 ( Berlin, NA 1, NA 2, EMEA 1) ACEND IS EMEA 1 BY CIRCUIT POINTS, SENTINELS IS NA1 , ENVY IS NA2
pool 2 ( KR, EMEA 2, LATAM, JP) ------- No NA 3 so it goes to next one available, you can change JP with BR 1 if you wish
pool 3 ( BR 1, SEA1, BR 2, SEA 2) ------- No EMEA 3, No KR 2, no JP 2
pool 4 ( LCQ)

Still doesn’t answer my question.

If we ignore this nonsense ‘results as a region’ thing you brought up and only Berlin results as you said, (“I already clarify to you that the criteria was Berlin placements”) why are teams who performed the same at Berlin in different pools?