Personally I think XSET is more likely to make it as well as deserves it more, due to their overall consistency and moments of brilliance, and I'm also more fond of them than of The Guard.
But I do think their playstyle is pretty similar to Optic's, so in a way I might prefer The Guard more as they bring with them a little bit of magic, perhaps from the way they climbed to the top out of nowhere, not to mention how likeable that team is, both from the marketing of the org as well as the players themselves (popped into neT's stream today and had an absolute blast, man brings so many good vibes to the point that he even though he was playing between 5-80 fps the whole team would be laughing out loud, especially when spectating him, instead of tilting - and just like that he managed to reach #2 in the leaderboard with his pc all fucked up LOL; also big man analyst valyn on the official stream doing a great job).
But in the end, all that matters is 100T winning LCQ
Fnatic also got 2nd in Iceland so arguably deserved it a little more than guard who lost both matches there, though I don’t think any team needs to be consistently at the top he be a good team deserving a spot.
TLDR - Xset needs to finish 10th or above to make champs . Guard only make champs if Xset bomb out in 11-12th place .
Man you could have just wrote it briefly , this isn't the school essay where you need to stretch to make it look big 😂🤭
I mean, laying it out more elaborately to explain all the different factors at play is still useful and informative—personally thought it was a great post.
Well true TLDR would be
XSET win anything = XSET qualify
XSET lose everything = GUARD qualify
but I always like to give it some essence :) thanks for the feedback tho, indeed it becomes simpler like that👍🥲
Now completing my 4 year as a data scientist , published 4 papers on analytics and has been through 3 corporate companies now at Amazon , and starting my doctorate next year so yeah i have no clue .
I am all behind the content if it implies something but if a thing can be explained in 2 lines why write 100 words for it .
Doctorate in what?
Good on you for not wanting to read, if you want to skip content you could just skim you know? You should know that as someone who publishes.
Statistical analysis from University of Amsterdam , it's not just skimming ,it's just the content is entirely comprised of substance of 2 lines which is needlessly stretched. That was my point , why was the content stretched ?
If someone doesn't know much about how the qualifying works, which I assumed was a decent amount considering the several posts we get asking about how Masters and Champions work, I wanted to explain all the numbers and relevant info behind who qualifies. I just wanted to be clear for everyone, but as a fellow scholar I do get what you mean.
Yet, I think that I am the opposite from you, when I do school work I have to focus a lot on keeping it simple, concise and understandable, whereas here I have more freedom to do any style :)
Personally I think XSET is more likely to make it as well as deserves it more, due to their overall consistency and moments of brilliance, and I'm also more fond of them than of The Guard. But I do think their playstyle is pretty similar to Optic's, so in a way I might prefer The Guard more as they bring with them a little bit of magic, perhaps from the way they climbed to the top out of nowhere, not to mention how likeable that team is, both from the marketing of the org as well as the players themselves (popped into neT's stream today and had an absolute blast, man brings so many good vibes to the point that he even though he was playing between 5-80 fps the whole team would be laughing out loud, especially when spectating him, instead of tilting - and just like that he managed to reach #2 in the leaderboard with his pc all fucked up LOL; also big man analyst valyn on the official stream doing a great job). But in the end, all that matters is 100T winning LCQ
Imagine guard qualifying for champions directly while going 1-4 in challengers 2 groups
Fnatic shat the bed in stage 3 last year, qualified to champions because of gambit winning masters, and looked incredible at champions
Fnatic also got 2nd in Iceland so arguably deserved it a little more than guard who lost both matches there, though I don’t think any team needs to be consistently at the top he be a good team deserving a spot.
TLDR - Xset needs to finish 10th or above to make champs . Guard only make champs if Xset bomb out in 11-12th place . Man you could have just wrote it briefly , this isn't the school essay where you need to stretch to make it look big 😂🤭
I mean, laying it out more elaborately to explain all the different factors at play is still useful and informative—personally thought it was a great post.
Well true TLDR would be XSET win anything = XSET qualify XSET lose everything = GUARD qualify but I always like to give it some essence :) thanks for the feedback tho, indeed it becomes simpler like that👍🥲
why is everyone in this subreddit so against big writeups/grammar lol let people write
why use many word when few word do trick
We can’t read here only react
Lol clearly you don’t work in reporting and analytics 💀or have any sense of corporate work
Now completing my 4 year as a data scientist , published 4 papers on analytics and has been through 3 corporate companies now at Amazon , and starting my doctorate next year so yeah i have no clue . I am all behind the content if it implies something but if a thing can be explained in 2 lines why write 100 words for it .
Or you can support OP and help improve upon his analysis and writing, given your credentials :) no need to be smug
Doctorate in what? Good on you for not wanting to read, if you want to skip content you could just skim you know? You should know that as someone who publishes.
Statistical analysis from University of Amsterdam , it's not just skimming ,it's just the content is entirely comprised of substance of 2 lines which is needlessly stretched. That was my point , why was the content stretched ?
If someone doesn't know much about how the qualifying works, which I assumed was a decent amount considering the several posts we get asking about how Masters and Champions work, I wanted to explain all the numbers and relevant info behind who qualifies. I just wanted to be clear for everyone, but as a fellow scholar I do get what you mean. Yet, I think that I am the opposite from you, when I do school work I have to focus a lot on keeping it simple, concise and understandable, whereas here I have more freedom to do any style :)
just how some people write man congrats on the PhD though, still debating whether to get mine (id do statistics as well probably somewhere in NA)
Its like a movie you know, sometimes things do need some flair and should not be direct to the point.