This genuinely makes no sense. In a game with almost 150 champions, allowing someone to ban "None" is extremely counter productive. I'd much rather them ban Alistar than no one if they "don't have anyone to ban".
It's just a silly option and takes away from team communication as well. If you don't know who to ban, wouldn't it make more sense to ask the team if there is anyone they want to ban?
As a person that bans none, I don't understand everyone's concern with banning none. Like, really, look at it this way. You'd prefer me to ban Alistar, who's basically never seen, rather than ban none. Banning Ali would mean my ban only has relevance in about 3 games of a hundred, THEN, when Ali is picked, he has a subpar WR and is statistically likelier to lose than he is to win. My point is, it's oftentimes worse to ban something than it is to ban none.
Everyone conveniently ignores this point while complaining about people who ban none, because it "hurts their winrate." What hurts your winrate more than someone banning none is someone banning the 45%~ WR champions that are Sylas, Yuumi, Irelia, and Yasuo who's pretty much always sub-50% WR. You know who bans those champions? Pretty much everyone. People who ban none aren't the big offenders here, but they're going to get insulted for being "faker wannabes" anyway.
It would make sense, but you're talking about Riot here...
really should ban a random, unselected champion. Preferrably a champion in the same position as the player or, conversely, any champion NOT in that position, depending on which is better for player feeling. (i.e., do players prefer counter-banning or will it result in accidentally banning your intended pick too much when players did not hover a selection in time)
People who ban no champions usually want practice against any match up. If you feel strongly about bans, you can always ask them in champ select to ban a champ for you.
