saying t1 is better than g2. thats not to take anything away from t1 they won they played better in the bo5 they deserve the win. but going forward for the rest of the year g2 will outplace t1 thats pretty obvious from their consistency and read on the meta meanwhile t1 fluctuate drastically depending on map they only have 4 good maps all of which they run double duelist on. also g2 are the biggest chokers i have seen in the game and im saying that as a g2 fan like seriously the grand final debuff for g2 is like 5x what it is for most teams. the t1 win is more of a match up diff then them just being better (g2's worst maps also happen to be t1's). the same thing happened in madrid last year the best team at the event lost and thats okay, results dont tell the whole story thats whats fun about watching esports or sports in general if the best team before the match won every time it would be boring.
0
Braindead take
posted in
General Discussion
Comments:
Threaded
Linear
People act like a team has to be good at all 7 maps in rotation to be "the best team" when the structure of competitive play allows map bans and weak maps. If a team is the best in the world at 4 maps and shit at 3 others, they are the best team because they will continuously win matches. Arguing that G2 is a better team currently than T1 after they lost a final with a 2 map advantage is literally insane. You could argue that they will improve and become better, or that they will have a better overall year, but they aren't the better team right now because they literally just proved it in front of our eyes
Discord