Slingshot Readers,

We NEED your support. More specifically, the author of this article needs your support. If you've been enjoying our content, you know that a lot of work goes into our stories and although it may be a work of passion, writers gotta eat. If just half our readers gave 1 DOLLAR a month, one measly dollar, we could fund all the work from StuChiu, DeKay, Emily, Andrew (and even Vince). If you contribute 5 DOLLARS a month, we invite you to join our Discord and hang with the team. We wouldn't bother you like this if we didn't need your help and you can feel good knowing that 100% of your donation goes to the writers. We'd really appreciate your support. After all, you're what makes all this happen. Learn more


Results don’t justify a bad play or argument

Chiu on This
A short and regular opinion blast from Stephen Chiu

‘Chiu on This’ is a short and regular opinion blast

When a player in CS:GO wins an amazing round, fans are likely to ignore anything the player did wrong. This doesn’t just apply to CS:GO, but to all other esports. It also applies to arguments. Today xms got an ace with five bullets, but in a 1-v-3 he refused to either reload or pick up another gun. While it was much more exciting that he didn’t do it, from an objective point of view that was a terrible play because reloading or getting a new gun that had more bullets wouldn’t have cost him anything.

I’ll also give another example from Dota 2. Nahaz said Liquid was locked to be invited to The International 7 because it had the best early game. TI invites have almost always been decided by LAN results, so the argument wasn’t sound. There was a Dota 2 thread after Liquid won EPICENTER saying Nahaz was right, but someone in the thread pointed out the fact that if Nahaz being right was predicated on the fact that Liquid had to win EPICENTER first, he was in fact wrong.


Leave a Reply