G2 vs VGIA
2-0 G2
R2.0 | ACS | K | D | A | +/– | KAST | ADR | HS% | FK | FD | +/– | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1.54 1.32 1.60 | 260 281 256 | 16 3 13 | / 6 2 4 / | 2 0 2 | +10 +1 +9 | 73% 67% 75% | 138 44 162 | 32% 50% 31% | 4 2 2 | 1 0 1 | +3 +2 +1 | |
|
1.49 2.49 1.24 | 255 429 212 | 12 5 7 | / 7 1 6 / | 14 0 14 | +5 +4 +1 | 93% 67% 100% | 165 187 159 | 14% 27% 9% | 2 0 2 | 0 0 0 | +2 0 +2 | |
|
1.48 0.43 1.75 | 350 176 394 | 19 1 18 | / 10 3 7 / | 3 1 2 | +9 -2 +11 | 73% 33% 83% | 205 59 241 | 21% 0% 27% | 4 0 4 | 0 0 0 | +4 0 +4 | |
|
1.25 0.30 1.48 | 230 98 263 | 12 1 11 | / 8 2 6 / | 7 1 6 | +4 -1 +5 | 87% 67% 92% | 153 61 176 | 16% 0% 19% | 2 0 2 | 1 1 0 | +1 -1 +2 | |
|
1.02 0.34 1.19 | 79 23 93 | 6 0 6 | / 4 2 2 / | 2 0 2 | +2 -2 +4 | 87% 67% 92% | 50 9 61 | 33% 0% 36% | 1 0 1 | 0 0 0 | +1 0 +1 |
R2.0 | ACS | K | D | A | +/– | KAST | ADR | HS% | FK | FD | +/– | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
0.86 0.63 1.78 | 162 120 333 | 8 4 4 | / 13 11 2 / | 2 2 0 | -5 -7 +2 | 47% 42% 67% | 105 78 213 | 43% 31% 60% | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | |
|
0.77 0.65 1.23 | 175 153 263 | 7 5 2 | / 13 11 2 / | 3 2 1 | -6 -6 0 | 53% 50% 67% | 127 119 162 | 23% 26% 19% | 1 0 1 | 3 3 0 | -2 -3 +1 | |
|
0.57 0.52 0.78 | 119 92 229 | 7 5 2 | / 13 11 2 / | 2 1 1 | -6 -6 0 | 53% 50% 67% | 72 63 110 | 33% 40% 20% | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | |
|
0.46 0.59 0.03 | 150 182 22 | 6 6 0 | / 13 11 2 / | 1 1 0 | -7 -5 -2 | 53% 58% 33% | 104 130 | 22% 22% | 1 1 0 | 3 2 1 | -2 -1 -1 | |
|
0.42 0.42 0.44 | 133 134 135 | 7 5 2 | / 13 11 2 / | 1 1 0 | -6 -6 0 | 47% 42% 67% | 92 88 110 | 21% 14% 50% | 0 0 0 | 7 6 1 | -7 -6 -1 |
R2.0 | ACS | K | D | A | +/– | KAST | ADR | HS% | FK | FD | +/– | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1.32 1.60 0.56 | 260 281 256 | 16 3 13 | / 6 2 4 / | 2 0 2 | +10 +1 +9 | 73% 67% 75% | 138 44 162 | 32% 50% 31% | 4 2 2 | 1 0 1 | +3 +2 +1 | |
|
2.49 1.24 0.55 | 255 429 212 | 12 5 7 | / 7 1 6 / | 14 0 14 | +5 +4 +1 | 93% 67% 100% | 165 187 159 | 14% 27% 9% | 2 0 2 | 0 0 0 | +2 0 +2 | |
|
0.43 1.75 0.54 | 350 176 394 | 19 1 18 | / 10 3 7 / | 3 1 2 | +9 -2 +11 | 73% 33% 83% | 205 59 241 | 21% 0% 27% | 4 0 4 | 0 0 0 | +4 0 +4 | |
|
0.30 1.48 0.46 | 230 98 263 | 12 1 11 | / 8 2 6 / | 7 1 6 | +4 -1 +5 | 87% 67% 92% | 153 61 176 | 16% 0% 19% | 2 0 2 | 1 1 0 | +1 -1 +2 | |
|
0.34 1.19 0.37 | 79 23 93 | 6 0 6 | / 4 2 2 / | 2 0 2 | +2 -2 +4 | 87% 67% 92% | 50 9 61 | 33% 0% 36% | 1 0 1 | 0 0 0 | +1 0 +1 |
R2.0 | ACS | K | D | A | +/– | KAST | ADR | HS% | FK | FD | +/– | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
0.63 1.78 0.31 | 162 120 333 | 8 4 4 | / 13 11 2 / | 2 2 0 | -5 -7 +2 | 47% 42% 67% | 105 78 213 | 43% 31% 60% | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | |
|
0.65 1.23 0.28 | 175 153 263 | 7 5 2 | / 13 11 2 / | 3 2 1 | -6 -6 0 | 53% 50% 67% | 127 119 162 | 23% 26% 19% | 1 0 1 | 3 3 0 | -2 -3 +1 | |
|
0.52 0.78 0.21 | 119 92 229 | 7 5 2 | / 13 11 2 / | 2 1 1 | -6 -6 0 | 53% 50% 67% | 72 63 110 | 33% 40% 20% | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | |
|
0.59 0.03 0.17 | 150 182 22 | 6 6 0 | / 13 11 2 / | 1 1 0 | -7 -5 -2 | 53% 58% 33% | 104 130 | 22% 22% | 1 1 0 | 3 2 1 | -2 -1 -1 | |
|
0.42 0.44 0.15 | 133 134 135 | 7 5 2 | / 13 11 2 / | 1 1 0 | -6 -6 0 | 47% 42% 67% | 92 88 110 | 21% 14% 50% | 0 0 0 | 7 6 1 | -7 -6 -1 |
R2.0 | ACS | K | D | A | +/– | KAST | ADR | HS% | FK | FD | +/– | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
0.00 0.00 0.00 | / / | |||||||||||
|
0.00 0.00 0.00 | / / | |||||||||||
|
0.00 0.00 0.00 | / / | |||||||||||
|
0.00 0.00 0.00 | / / | |||||||||||
|
0.00 0.00 0.00 | / / |
R2.0 | ACS | K | D | A | +/– | KAST | ADR | HS% | FK | FD | +/– | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
0.00 0.00 0.00 | / / | |||||||||||
|
0.00 0.00 0.00 | / / | |||||||||||
|
0.00 0.00 0.00 | / / | |||||||||||
|
0.00 0.00 0.00 | / / | |||||||||||
|
0.00 0.00 0.00 | / / |
Both have to face seed 1 from Tr or CIS there’s no seeding between regions. So if you think it is easier because Gambit > SMB Riot can’t apply that because is a subjective opinion
The only point where Acend has harder bracket is with Eu seed. Acend has 3 and 5 and G2 has 4 and 6. But in practice there is not a lot of difference. (This is the part that I don’t understand, but is not that relevant)
What I don’t understand is why all CIS teams are in the upper part and the Turk teams in the lower
That's my point, why is G2 playing against objectively worse EU seeds than Acend is.
The only point where Acend has harder bracket is with Eu seed. Acend has 3 and 5 and G2 has 4 and 6. But in practice there is not a lot of difference. (This is the part that I don’t understand, but is not that relevant)
It is very relevant in my opinion. Acend as a winner in Challengers 1 Grand Finals is playing the winner of Challengers 2 Grand Finals, while G2 as a loser of Challengers 1 Grand Finals is playing the loser of Challengers 2 Grand Finals. It should have been the winner of Challengers 1 Grand Finals playing the loser of Challengers 2 Grand Finals to make proper sense. In a nutshell, currently there is no proper seeding reward for Acend who overcame G2 in Challengers 1 Grand Finals.
Not that I'm complaining, just pointing things out, as it still shows that either F4U or Riot Games EU are still like headless chickens when it comes to executing the seeds.
You’re right, it is unfair. But the only thing I can think of which also would explain why the CIS teams are in the upper part of the bracket and the Turkish teams in the lower part, is that they are thinking in the lower brackets? If you loose you’ll face easier teams??
It still make 0 sense but it is the only reason that I can think of to try to justify this bracket
It might still be unfair but it makes sense when Oxygen is higher seeded than both Liquid and NAVI. This reddit post has a list that shows the seeding (at least this seeding would make sense if you look at the bracket composition, I'm not too sure where it is from): https://www.reddit.com/r/ValorantCompetitive/comments/owil1v/alternative_stage_3_emea_bracket_if_cis_was/
Edit:
How I understand the seeding to bracket composition:
https://imgur.com/wKCEbmn
Since the Turkish community is so large, some of them may not understand that this is humor, but your behavior at the top doesn't change anything. As I said, the main problem was with the servers. No need to fight with each other it's just a game. But it was unfortunate for the Turkish side because they were trying to come back. This is valid for the two matches I mentioned, SMB was also returning in the same way.
I don't know about G2 match but the FPX side wasn't agree with the remake. pAura said: "Their coaches said that they had a good position" but when you look at the game FPX side were 4 A stack and SMB were going B side in 4v4 position so the desicion about the SMB game wasn't FPX's choice. But as i said idk the G2 side. Probably G2 wanted to remake.