ChuDat Signs with Mortality eSports

[NoiseHERO]

I dunno who ChuDat is, but that name is awesome.

 

[The Derrit]

But the key point is debatably. Ken has earned an official sponsorship before any of the people in the top 10, and there are still quite a few players that are the same league as the people in Top 10 that aren't in SoCal that still aren't sponsored. I'm not saying Ken is bad, but it's common knowledge that Ken isn't placing as well/consistently as players like Westballz and Axe, and those players don't have sponsors. Even players that are considered to be on the same level or slightly better (ex. Nintendude) don't have sponsors. And to be honest, as great as he places at locals, ultimately his performance at regionals and nationals hold more weight, and he hasn't placed notably compared to some of his non-sponsored opponents (that are better than him) at regionals, and he hasn't really been to any nationals. So yeah, generally the argument that his placings aren't as strong as some of the non-sponsored players holds weight.

Sponsorship is not a meritocracy. Axe is some guy who plays pikachu. Shroomed is sponsored by another company. Ken is the King of Smash.

Who would you rather be able to say works for you? That pikachu guy or the King of Smash? If you're saying the former then you're not understanding how business works.

It's the same reason Kevin Love doesn't get the attention Chris Bosh does. Kevin Love plays for a losing team and has no success to his name. Chris Bosh is not much or any better, but he plays for a perennial championship contender. Who is going to get more airplay? The guy that people know about. In this case, it's Ken.

 

[KayB]

Sponsorship is not a meritocracy. Axe is some guy who plays pikachu. Shroomed is sponsored by another company. Ken is the King of Smash.

Who would you rather be able to say works for you? That pikachu guy or the King of Smash? If you're saying the former then you're not understanding how business works.

It's the same reason Kevin Love doesn't get the attention Chris Bosh does. Kevin Love plays for a losing team and has no success to his name. Chris Bosh is not much or any better, but he plays for a perennial championship contender. Who is going to get more airplay? The guy that people know about. In this case, it's Ken.

Tbh, I digressed too much, and the sponsorship thing was a mistake on my part. I know how sponsorship works and how attention matters more than placings, but I was more or less trying to gauge the quality of Ken's performance and accidentally ended up using sponsorship as an example. My original point (to itsbme) is that you shouldn't deny people based off of hierarchy and I think I've already made my point by now.

You know, it's funny because I never argued about kens placing, which you seem to be going on about. I was talking about how it sounds for someone just to call someone bad. It'd be different if he said, you know ken hasn't placed high at bigger tourneys, why is he picked versus so and so? No, instead he called liquid dumb because ken isn't good anymore. That's what I was referencing. And it honestly sounds ridiculous for some random to call ken bad when he's beaten pro players. Just because ken isn't beating mango and the other top tens consistently that doesn't make him bad. But if that's the case, everyone that doesn't get top ten at a national blows.

Also, maybe liquid picked ken because he shows drive to get better, has the potential, and has been getting better. He has a winners attitude and doesn't quit just because matches aren't going his way. Win or lose he keeps his composer. He shows a lot of maturity. He represents the community well and his team.

My argument is that you were criticizing someone off of bad logic lol. Talking about Ken's placings was simply just a sub point that you decided to capitalize on.

 

[itsbme]

Tbh, I digressed too much, and the sponsorship thing was a mistake on my part. I know how sponsorship works and how attention matters more than placings, but I was more or less trying to gauge the quality of Ken's performance and accidentally ended up using sponsorship as an example. My original point (to itsbme) is that you shouldn't deny people based off of hierarchy and I think I've already made my point by now.


My argument is that you were criticizing someone off of bad logic lol. Talking about Ken's placings was simply just a sub point that you decided to capitalize on.

What bad logic is that, because he's not high ranked he can't give his opinion? Not what I meant. He was some random calling ken and kdj bad and not deserving of sponsorship. If mango had said that it'd still be dumb but at least he's better than most players compared to himself because yeah ken is worse than him. At least he would have that, his understanding of the game and performance, so he knows what he's talking about more than the average player. But when you aren't established and you go around saying someone is bad and the sponsor picking them is dumb, and yet you don't have any credentials to at least back up what you're saying, or you can't even explain why you think what you think, then it shows imo that you even know what you're talking about.

Having said that, freedom of speech, okay that's fine. But guess what people are going to disagree like myself.