nightz is supposed to play, idk about cane

ez 4 rankers

Hard disagree with just about everything you said

P0PPIN is a known streamsniper so no

Well he's not sniping in challengers, and he's doing just about as good as the rest of them, on Sova/Skye too. You could make a real case that out of all of them he's the one that can make the best transition to actual organized play and is most likely to get picked up by a real challengers team. Personally I think he's their 2nd best player

Nightz1x and Canezerra has crazy aim but I think Nightz clears Cane in terms of understanding the game better.

Regarding Nightz, I think his aim might be slightly better but he literally only has a 'ranked' skillset. Like he can only really play Clove Iso Yoru Reyna.
Cane is a much better hard entry (jett raze neon). I also don't think ego swinging smokes and taking ridiculous fights is indicative of a high level understanding of the game.

Eggster can definitely play Tier 1 if he chose not to one trick Yoru. He has the skill and the talent.

Not gonna pretend ur being serious here

Inspire has the experience but needs to just aim better and not tilt.

'just aim better'

His experience from the last 2 years:

• the current Rankers Run (made it past groups stage after real challengers basically ended)
• subbed one game for TSM in RBHG qualifier
• the lil bro cup
• the G4 rumble

Yap Warning

Alot of people are getting the relationship between rank and talent wrong imo, especially since Rankers' run through challengers so far

Ranked is a loose indicator of talent

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lets look at the posterboy of rank = t1 talent, Primmie : https://tracker.gg/valorant/profile/riot/Scooby%20dooby%20doo%23wheru/overview

Of course, primmie is a t1 level player/talent, but the problem is when people say that we knew that from how good he is in ranked (#1 every act, insane tracker, etc). You can not infer that because he's good in ranked, that that makes him talented enough for T1. The relationship is the opposite, it's because he is talented that he is so good in ranked

And this condition does not always hold. Not every good player is good in ranked, not everybody good in ranked is good at pro play (more commonly).

Let's look at EG Nature : https://tracker.gg/valorant/profile/riot/EG%20NaturE%23RAT/overview

Wow, look at that, an absolutely insane tracker. 1200+ rr peak, 941/1000 TRS, 1.34 K/D, S tier every stat, 76% winrate, all while locking initiator (sova/breach/fade)

But in pro play, he's not even considered a top player in t1 play, even amongst igls, or even mechanically amongst domestic 'fragging' igls (Kingg, Valyn, Johnqt, Rossy all clear)

Now lets look at t3xture, arguably the best duelist in the world, and a Masters MVP : https://tracker.gg/valorant/profile/riot/GEN%20t3xture%239999/overview

Good, but nothing crazy
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So what is the relationship between rank and talent with regards to pro play? As previously mentioned, its very loose, but I propose a simple system

T4 - If you can consistently hit imm2 or higher in ranked if ranking up was your only objective , you have enough talent to be a T4 Player. This does not mean hitting that rank makes you a T4 player, but that you have enough talent for that level of play.

T3 - If you can consistently hit bottom radiant or higher in ranked if ranking up was your only objective, you have enough talent to be a T3 Player. This does not mean hitting that rank makes you a T3 player, but that you have enough talent for that level of play.

T2 - If you can consistently hit top 150 Radiant or higher in ranked if ranking up was your only objective, you have enough talent to be a T2 Player. This does not mean hitting that rank makes you a T2 player, but that you have enough talent for that level of play.

T1 - It does not matter how good you are in ranked. You should be able to hit top 50, but other factors are much more important in determining whether or not you are T1 capable. (Experience, understanding of the game, understanding of your role, etc)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why is it that rank does not matter much for T1 consideration? Because contrary to common belief, there are actually a good bit of players who are not in t1 who have better mechanics than most t1 pros (ex: Geeza - currently a collegiate player)

Primmie and Karon are the EXCEPTIONS. Does anybody here think that if Poppin was picked up to a T1 team that he would be in consideration for GOAT of his role within his first year, like Karon? Please identify yourself if you think so.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This of course isn't to say that rank means nothing. RANKERS, composed of 4 notorious ranked demons + inspire, made it to Challengers Playoffs with no practice. But keep in mind this is literally the best of the best when it comes to pug stacking. 4 of those players have been getting to rank 1 consistently these past few acts. What they've done is very impressive, and does show that rank is an indicator of talent, just a loose one.

banh bao and spaz

Meteor

Knights Ban

he would also average a 3.0 rating if he played in GC 😭

I can't say i'm the world's expert on reaction times, but it seems to me there's 2 distinct questions

1. Is there a sex based difference in reaction times?

There is probably a small, but measurable difference.

2. Does this constitute an insurmountable advantage that requires separation for the purposes of fairness like most traditional sports (Track, Weightlifting, Swimming, Basketball, etc)

Almost certainly not

im with you on basically everything

but Sliggy did deserve his spot on that grid

Hard to make a broad statement on all of society. I'll say even by vlr standards op's arguments are bad (confusing figure 4 from study 2 to be related to reaction time is a pretty unforgivable mistake if you want to be taken seriously)

I'd say overall it's not too bad except for two areas:

News/Politics: If you see a news article that is trying to push a political agenda of any type (very common), be very careful with whatever stat they throw at you, because 1. Journalists aren't very good at stats. and 2. It's famously easy to twist data to fit a narrative.
As an example, there's a notorious stat/study that suggested that having a gun in your household made you much more likely to get die to one. Purely Statistically it's true, but it turns out that one of the reasons people get guns in the first place is because they live in sketchy areas where they are dealing with gun violence.

Social Studies Research: In particular, the paradigm of Null-Hypothesis-Significance-Testing (NHST) got so butchered over the years in the social sciences (psychology in particular), that one journal banned it and the American Statistical Society had to make a statement on its proper use.

Outside of those two areas its not too bad.

Firstly, I should start by saying I don't think think there is a meaningful biological advantage, and further still, I don't even think GC should exist at all

But as someone who does this stuff for a living, i felt the need to chime in because you're not drawing your conclusion from ultra-sound reasoning

Study 1

You did get the basic ideas right but your conclusion is kinda off. The study itself has a section on gender which sums it all up neatly:

A review of the literature on the influence of gender on RT shows that in almost every age group, males have faster RTs as compared to females, and female disadvantage is not reduced by practice.[13,14,15] Researches done by Misra et al.[16] also showed that males responded faster than females. Study done by Shelton and Kumar,[11] Nikam and Gadkari[17] also reported similar findings to support females have longer RTs than males. The results of our study [Table 2a] agree with these studies and indicate that male medical students have faster RTs when compared to female medical students for both auditory, as well as visual stimuli. In our study when sedentary male and female medical students [Table 2b] were compared removing any confounding factors, RTs of male students were faster; thereby further supporting the evidence that males have faster RTs than females.
The male-female difference is due to the lag between the presentation of the stimulus and the beginning of muscle contraction. It is documented in the literature that the muscle contraction time is the same for males and females[18] and motor responses in males are comparatively stronger than females,[19] this explains why males have faster simple RTs for both auditory as well as visual stimuli. Nowadays the male advantage is getting smaller, possibly because more women are participating in driving and fast-action sports.[19] This is evident from Table 2c in which nonsignificant differences were obtained when regularly exercising male and female medical students were compared.

So yes, they did in fact find a non-significant difference between regularly exercising men and women. But notice that in the discussion of gender, the conclusion was not that there is no difference, but that the male advantage is 'getting smaller', purportedly because of driving or fast action sports (a hypothesis for another time). You shouldn't draw the conclusion that the authors think they proved that there is no difference at all between 'fit' men vs women, but that their results are in line with the existing literature that established a shrinking (to what extent?) difference under certain conditions. They conclude in pretty clear terms:

Male medical students have faster RTs as compared to female medical students for both auditory, as well as visual stimuli.

It should also be noted that the samples for the 'fit' men vs women test was much lower (literally n=4 for the women) compared to every other test.
And yes, I am well aware that statistically speaking there isn't anything necessarily invalid about this (if you look at the history of the T-test it actually was developed for small samples), but it is something to keep in mind.

The bigger problem though is that your application of this to Valorant, which sort of relies on the assumption that professional gamers are a category of people who live an active lifestyle. Even if there a couple here and there.. I don't think it's a reach to say that it's actually the opposite in the vast majority of cases (very sedentary).

Study 2

The study itself notes that their result isn't in line with a previous study, and suggests that it's because of the way they measured reaction time:

A possible explanation is that, in the present study the reaction time is defined as the time between the moment that the L3 AV system issues the takeover request and the moment that drivers have completely switched to the manual driving position, which is the position where the drivers have put their hands on the steering wheel, feet on the pedals and eyes on the road. Before the moment that the L3 AV detects the stationary red vehicle and initiates a takeover request to the drivers, it was performing automated driving and the drivers were performing the non-driving related task (reading) and were completely disengaged from driving. Therefore, at the moment that they were suddenly asked by the L3 AV to take over control of the vehicle, they had little information about the current driving situation. Croson and Gneezy42 suggested that, when dealing with uncertain situations, females are more cautious and less confident compared to males, which may have resulted in a slightly faster movement to switch back to the manual driving position among female participants in this study, thus leading to a faster reaction time. Moreover, another possible reason could be that, as females are found to be more concerned about automated vehicles than males33,36, their higher level of concern may have led to a more eager desire to regain manual control of the vehicle, thus they exhibited faster reactions as soon as they perceived the takeover request issued by the L3 AV. Apart from their faster reaction times, female drivers were found to have significantly smaller steering wheel angles compared to male drivers, with a significant difference of 1.41° (95% CI 0.04° to 2.78°), which reflects a slightly more stable operation of the steering wheel during the takeover process and thus indicating better takeover performance. This is in accordance with the findings of previous studies about gender difference in terms of driving behaviour. Compared to males, female drivers exhibited more cautious and less risk-taking driving behaviour, and were more patient in urgent situations29,30,42.

tldr : there's reason to believe that their results with regards to reaction time had to do with women being more cautious drivers, because their
measure of reaction time had to do with retaking control of a (simulated) vehicle and/or making subsequent decisions (i.e being quicker to turn on your indicator to change lanes - literally one of the tasks).

I also don't know where '0.022 ms' came from. I literally cntrl searched the page for it and nothing came up.
And btw, the whole 'steer + brake' thing (figure 4) isn't even about reaction time.

Study 3

I'm ngl im not about to pay money to read this. I'm just gonna be lazy and point out that it's from 1980 and Study 1 is more recent and included a literature review which ran contra the abstract presented here.

Fuck it

Paul vs USYK

Lets give the people what they want 😈😈😈

has he said who it will be yet?

quick somebody ask him !!!

potentially when riot scraps GC making GC players have an incentive to play in the open circuit and progress with their player development

so realistically never

fair

nah he actually had a really good kickoff and stage 2

even when he was in a slump during stage 1 he wasn't too bad
-----------------
just have him on duelist no?

Lemme cook

must've went to br*tain

they probably cross the cosmos to come and try some

Are they real?

Are they visiting us?

Did the US government capture a flying saucer in Roswell?

Are they storing the craft in area 51?

Is Bob Lazar telling the truth?

Did brazil capture live extraterrestrials in Varginha?

What do yall think about this topic?

We know flore is an incredible duelist and deserves a spot in vct

the literally signed him while the only duelist he could play was jett

and it was obviously his main role/agent, as he played 251/459 rounds at champs on Jett

and he had the best aim in the world

So the exact decision you said a 'conventional' team should never make won them champs

https://www.vlr.gg/248277/paper-rex-vs-evil-geniuses-valorant-champions-2023-playoffs-gf

"If you are living under a delusion, then you aren't sane, and such a condition could therefore not serve the function of protecting sanity"

-Plato

but if you're delusional then you aren't sane

Sage Res obv

Real ones know swiftplay is and always was the most serious gamemode fr fr

of Swiftplay

https://tracker.gg/valorant/profile/riot/drew%23luna/overview?season=all

• Peak Radiant
• 1075 hours of Swiftplay over 5600+ matches
• Dropped a 24/5, ~700 ACS performance where he 6-0'd Mada and still lost

expect an inspirational performance

lowkey i can see a world that they make it too

and seeing eggster in playoffs will be so surreal

https://www.vlr.gg/event/2150/challengers-league-2024-north-america-stage-3/group-stage (scroll to bottom)

Realistically who do they beat/lose to

Nature is Healing

closest thing to what your looking for, not girls only but that shouldn't matter

https://www.vlechallengersleague.com/

advertised for low-elo players, max rank allowed is ASC 2

Don't know if its for every region though

When he washes his face how high up does he go?

Found the match: https://tracker.gg/valorant/match/c8483050-c356-4b9f-94b5-b1071919d230

The fake Chronicle's # is 444 (notice how you hid that in the first pic)

The real one's is #777 : https://tracker.gg/valorant/profile/riot/FNATIC%20Chronicle%23777/overview

#STOPSPREADINGMISINFORMATIONONVLR

If you accept the premise of GC, which is that certain 'genders' are marginalized and therefore require separate competition, then living a considerable portion of your life as a non-marginalized gender would be an unfair advantage.

But the reality is that GC is just a t4 league and flor is better than t4. Nothing to do with an inherent advantage.

Yeah but that just means the outcome felt better for you. Objectively, what Zekken did was not far off at all, and against a better team and without one of the most obviously broken agents in the games history
---------------------------------------
My personal favorite moment of the year was Fnatic getting bodied on Lotus. Those spam kills on boaster were the cherry on top. Cinema at its finest.

That same team lost more finals than PRX in just 1 year

Magnum can say the same

Zekken's 101 is more impressive than KangKang's 111 because:

• He did it against a better team. A team that would win the next trophy and is most people's pick for the best team of that year
• He did it without neon. KangKang played the majority of that finals on it. An agent that is comparable to chamber only got him 10 more kills.

Never say never

Abyss - Sova Kayo Cypher Jett Omen

Team: DRX

Bind - Fade Gekko Viper Brim Raze

Team: TH

Sunset - Sova Kayo Cypher Omen Neon

Team : EDG

i'm inspired

I hope Riot identifies the specific game designer(s) who designed neon

I wanna write some emails and make sure their current/future employers understand what they accomplished in that project

he won champs before the neon meta and got 3rd during it

counterpoint, if they lost to them then they weren't a more deserving team

They definitely can qual, they have 4 players who hit rank 1 consistently, but if it happens imo its gonna be through lowers because winthrop should take them out

keep this going yall i know there is more out there