You're gonna have to give me a quote on the first one: I don't have access to it

As for the second:

"Trying to assign exact percentages to the relative contributions of “culture” versus “biology” to the behavior of free-living human individuals in a complex social environment is tough at best. Halpern offers a succinct assessment: 'The role of culture is not zero. The role of biology is not zero.'"

The author admits a degree of error that can be attributed to socio-cultural factors, and not innate biology on the nature of their findings. There's no absolute certainty

Too much ego to admit I'm wrong? I'm responding to everything you're saying in a timely fashion, please stop projecting your insecurities. I can see why you insist that rats are identical to humans if you're basing it off of what you see in the mirror every day

Care to actually cite something from one of those articles that backs that point up, rather than pretending it's in there somewhere, buddy?

No, you're genuinely braindead if you think rats are comparable to humans. Studies on rats only lead us to hypotheses on how similar humans can be, never conclusive results.

Also, if your idea of winning an argument is spamming as many articles (that you didn't read) as you want until you reach a point where nobody will bother actually reading them, then sure you can pretend you're smart

The reason it drives me crazy is because I'm seeing troglodytes like you pretending to care about science when all you're doing is googling for anything that will reinforce your bias and copy-pasting it without even reading through it because you're too stupid to actually understand it

You illiterate dumbfuck, you're not even reading your own sources.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5999374/
"Reaction time
The ANOVA on RT with angular disparity as the within-participant factor and sex as the between-participant factor showed a main effect on angular disparity: F(7, 196)=73.66, P<0.001, ηp2=0.725. A t-test for paired samples showed that the RTs were higher on each consecutive angular disparity up to 180° (P≤0.001) and lower on each consecutive angular disparity from 180° up to 315° (P<0.001). Because of multiple testing, Bonferroni correction was chosen and the significance standard was set to α=0.007. For the factor sex, there was no main effect of sex on RT: F(1, 28)=0.287, P=0.596, ηp2=0.01 and no significant interaction between both factors: F(7, 196)=0.487, P=0.591, ηp2=0.02.

Accuracy rate
The ANOVA on the accuracy rate with angular disparity as the within-participant factor and sex as the between-participant factor showed a main effect on angular disparity: F(7, 196)=24.59, P<0.001, ηp2=0.468. A t-test for paired samples showed the accuracy rate to be higher for the angular disparity of 45° compared with 90°, 135° compared with 180°, 225° compared with 270°, and for the angular disparity of 270° compared with 315° (all P<0.001). All other consecutive comparisons did not show any significance. Because of multiple testing, Bonferroni correction was chosen and the significance standard was set to α=0.007. There was no main effect of sex on the accuracy rate: F(1, 28)=0.114, P=0.738, ηp2=0.004, and no significant interaction between both factors: F(7, 196)=1.130, P=0.346, ηp2=0.039.

Eye-tracking data
Fixation numbers
The ANOVA for the number of fixations with angular disparity as the within-participant factor and sex as the between-participant factor showed a main effect on angular disparity: F(7, 196)=80.71, P<0.001, ηp2=0.742. A t-test for paired samples showed the number of fixations to be higher on each consecutive angular disparity up to 180° (P<0.001) and lower on each consecutive angular disparity from 180° up to 315° (P<0.001). Because of multiple testing, Bonferroni correction was chosen and the significance standard was set to α=0.007. There was no main effect of sex on fixation numbers: F(1, 28)=0.048, P=0.829, ηp2=0.002, and no significant interaction between both factors: F(7, 196)=0.34, P=0.754, ηp2=0.012."

Also 2 of the sources you cite are studies on rats.

Istg these fucking dropouts googling "gender differences in gaming" and copy pasting anything they see, then pretending to be academics drives me crazy

"Which is not to say every man’s or woman’s brain looks the same. Our multitudinous genetic variations interact with some of our genes’ differential responsiveness to estrogens versus androgens. This complicated pinball game affects goings-on in at least some of the brain’s neural circuits and in whatever little piece of behavior each of these neural circuits manages."

"Bigger imaging studies and imaginative animal research now in the works promise to reveal much more about humanity’s inherent — although by no means uniform, and often not substantial — sex-associated cognitive differences and vulnerability to diseases.

Trying to assign exact percentages to the relative contributions of “culture” versus “biology” to the behavior of free-living human individuals in a complex social environment is tough at best. Halpern offers a succinct assessment: 'The role of culture is not zero. The role of biology is not zero.'"

There is no citation for this: "Many of these cognitive differences appear quite early in life. ‘You see sex differences in spatial-visualization ability in 2- and 3-month-old infants.’"

Article 1: Don't have access

Article 2: "On this basis, we performed a correlation analysis of gender differences and age and found that gender differences in individual spatial ability increased as individuals grew older. Due to the complex interaction of other factors like individual differences, growth environment and experimental conditions, this finding may not apply to all meta-analyses, but the high correlation index represents and explains the development and growth trend in connection to gender differences in individual spatial ability."

Article 3: Don't have access

Article 4: This is a study on rats dipshit

Article 5: This is also a study on rats

Article 6: "The commonly reported pattern of decreasing RT mean and variability in childhood and adolescence, followed by an increase in mean and variability through adulthood and into old age, was confirmed. Greater intraindividual variability for females in SRT and CRT was observed in adults but not in children. Males had significantly faster mean SRT than did females across the life span, but there were no sex differences in mean CRT."

Article 7: "Reaction time

The ANOVA on RT with angular disparity as the within-participant factor and sex as the between-participant factor showed a main effect on angular disparity: F(7, 196)=73.66, P<0.001, ηp2=0.725. A t-test for paired samples showed that the RTs were higher on each consecutive angular disparity up to 180° (P≤0.001) and lower on each consecutive angular disparity from 180° up to 315° (P<0.001). Because of multiple testing, Bonferroni correction was chosen and the significance standard was set to α=0.007. For the factor sex, there was no main effect of sex on RT: F(1, 28)=0.287, P=0.596, ηp2=0.01 and no significant interaction between both factors: F(7, 196)=0.487, P=0.591, ηp2=0.02."

"Accuracy rate

The ANOVA on the accuracy rate with angular disparity as the within-participant factor and sex as the between-participant factor showed a main effect on angular disparity: F(7, 196)=24.59, P<0.001, ηp2=0.468. A t-test for paired samples showed the accuracy rate to be higher for the angular disparity of 45° compared with 90°, 135° compared with 180°, 225° compared with 270°, and for the angular disparity of 270° compared with 315° (all P<0.001). All other consecutive comparisons did not show any significance. Because of multiple testing, Bonferroni correction was chosen and the significance standard was set to α=0.007. There was no main effect of sex on the accuracy rate: F(1, 28)=0.114, P=0.738, ηp2=0.004, and no significant interaction between both factors: F(7, 196)=1.130, P=0.346, ηp2=0.039."

"The ANOVA for the number of fixations with angular disparity as the within-participant factor and sex as the between-participant factor showed a main effect on angular disparity: F(7, 196)=80.71, P<0.001, ηp2=0.742. A t-test for paired samples showed the number of fixations to be higher on each consecutive angular disparity up to 180° (P<0.001) and lower on each consecutive angular disparity from 180° up to 315° (P<0.001). Because of multiple testing, Bonferroni correction was chosen and the significance standard was set to α=0.007. There was no main effect of sex on fixation numbers: F(1, 28)=0.048, P=0.829, ηp2=0.002, and no significant interaction between both factors: F(7, 196)=0.34, P=0.754, ηp2=0.012."

Read your own fucking articles dumbass

One day you'll learn how to read :)

Read your own fucking article you imbecile. It only says females have disadvantages in cognitive tasks only during their period, but have identical cognitive ability while not in their period.

"Male cognitive functions were comparable to female preovulatory phase cognitive functions. However, females, during postovulatory phase of their cycle, may have advantages in executive tasks (Stroop test) and disadvantages in attentional tasks (VRT), as compared to males."

No that does not mean women have different genes, it just means they don't receive anything from one half of their father's genes upon inception

Furthermore, that's completely irrelevant on the topic of gender differences, since the genes you receive from either both X chromosomes or your X and Y chromosomes both completely depend on the person, their parents, etc. which are factors completely separate from gender.

Cite the studies please.

Also why are you talking about genetics? women don't have different genes than men dumbass; they're not a different species

As for hormonal balance, there's enough trans women on estrogen that can prove how irrelevant it is in multiple video games

The paper you cited does not definitively prove any neural differences given all the other factors that could lead to a difference in cognitive strategy

Additionally just look at Vania--she was owning Benjyfishy and frying against all the coed teams (some of which had 3 VCT players on them) during the latest Off-season tournament with G2

I mean, she definitely mogged this A1mly guy

https://www.vlr.gg/413193/g2-gozen-vs-nasr-ignite-vct-off-season-spotlight-series-2024-uf

I think you're staring into 2022 not 2025

are you going to ignore the socio-cultural differences?

The whole paper is based on a hypothesis of different strategies for task-solving and which genders trend toward which cognitive strategies, which the author admits can be influenced by social and cultural factors

Chess

Hou Yifan peaked 2686 official FIDE rating in classical chess, making her a top 100 player in the world, and in the top 0.5% among Grandmasters

She also peaked 2704 official FIDE rating in blitz chess (5 minute games)

She was the 55th best player in the world.

that was 92 elo away from Fabiano Caruana, who was the US challenger to Magnus Carlsen for World Champion in 2018 and the #2 player in the world at that time--whom she also beat in an official game in 2017 https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1870992

"While significant gender differences in spatial abilities consistently emerge, results concerning gender differences in spatial orientation skills are mixed"

"The influence of biological and socio/cultural factors is discussed as well as the hypothesis that gender differences are due to different strategies used to solve orientation tasks. The role of personality factors and the influence of spatial anxiety in orientation performance are also discussed."

From that exact same study btw

How many doctors are in North Sentinel island?

It's not my intent to shit on those who've already tried/are trying

To me it's a statistics game.

By a huge margin, more men play video games than women.

Of the minority of women that play video games, only a portion of them play PC games

Of the women that play PC games, only some of them play FPS games

Of the women that play PC FPS games, only some of them play Valorant

Of the women that play video games, happen to play PC games, happen to also play FPS games, and whose main game happens to be valorant, only some of them actually have the money required to buy the right equipment to train on to go pro.

Of the women that play video games, happen to play PC games, happen to also play FPS games, whose main game happens to be valorant, and who have the money required to buy the necessary peripherals, only a minority of them have the desire to even go Pro in the first place

and of the women who meet all the above criteria:
only a portion of them have the determination to keep going despite everyone around them telling them they are at a biological disadvantage and with absolutely no precedent to draw from that they will ever reach their dreams.

There are 48 teams in T1, with 5 spots for players each. That's 240 slots for players to make it to Tier1.

Assuming men outnumber women even 10000-1 after all the above filters, then that means for every one of those 240 spots in Tier1, there's a 0.01% chance that it will go to a woman (Ignoring the small possibility of blatant sexism from teams in player selection).

You tell me the probability of a woman making it into tier1 all those factors considered, and under the assumption that women=men in average potential (which I personally believe to be true)

how many trans people are in t1?

The first line is irrelevant.

If skills don't always translate over, how does it in any way make sense to argue that because women haven't succeeded in t1 in other games, they won't succeed in t1 in a new game--which requires a different skillset--that has been out for only 4 years?

Are you equally as good at league of legends as you are at valorant?

Answer the question.

Of those, how many of them play PC games specifically?

How many of them play Video Games, specifically?

Answer the question

What is the average number of females in gaming?

You're misquoting a study that concludes nothing of the sort

I beg of you to show me a single person on North Sentinel Island that has a PhD

Yes, because you're the authority on what is and isn't important in FPS games.

Furthermore, that was in relation to long-term memory, not short-term memory--which is absolutely useless in an actual match.

Additionally, it was only in some complex visual-spatial tasks--not all of them. And among those tasks, not all of them would equally translate to an FPS (and whether they would translate to valorant specifically is another question)

GC teams don't get any money from riot.

The t2 venues are larger than the GC venues

the only prizepools in GC are for winning regionals ($5000 dollars, a funhaver invitational pays more) and champs, ($500k) which would absolutely not be enough to support T2

500k, that's enough to support 1 tier 2 org

the GC money would do absolutely nothing to fix the t2 scene

How much?

There was none to begin with. GC isn't even that expensive

what t2 money?

fr

They lose all their ranked games and need to cope by convincing themselves they have a biological advantage over the people they infantilize

Champs is tier3, GF is on the edge of tier2

Qualifiers are tier5

I'll play with you, but only on tokyo servers

.

Frost would have to replace Governor or Ban.

It could work if they put primmie on jett/raze/neon but we have no idea how good he is with agents other than jett at a t1 level.

Assuming that won't work:

-Replacing Governor would mean sScary wouldn't match Talon's roles
-Can't replace Ban because he's been doing really good recently
-Can't replace both because he'll be booted off as coach if he goes full Thai

Duelist:

1. Zekken
2. OXY
3. Jawgemo
4. Mada
5. Sym
6. Cryo

talent wise it is a powerhouse

don't trust recent stats during off-season. one funhaver invitational can pad them and one SEN showmatch can tank them

No it's G2 or NRG

Im pansexual

Im not chatgpt

She's very patient with me