How the Ban System Prevents and Lowers Permabans
The teams will be more hesitant to ban "OP" champions because if the OTHER team bans these, it's a wasted slot for the first team. If 2 yasuo bans are used by both teams, one of them is useless because a champion cannot be double-banned (it does nothing extra).
If I am using this system, I may think "oh, the other team will likely ban Yasuo/Lee/Lucian etc.". Therefore, I won't be banning any of those champions so I don't waste my bans. Instead, I will pick bans that focus more on our team and its counters. If we have 2 or more tanks, I will be banning Vayne or Fiora. If we have an all-AD team, I'm banning Rammus or Malphite. Assassins on our team? Bans on Kayle, Annie, or Lissandra. If I go for a classic "OP" ban, I'm risking wasting my ban if the enemy team bans them as well. Although this would technically be a waste for the OTHER team as well, my team could have taken advantage of a technical "extra ban".
By doing "blind banning" it allows for some of these classically "op" champions to not be banned as much due to anticipation of the other team banning them. Is that a good thing? We'll see; it hasn't come out yet.
Hopefully this will make the game more strategic as a whole, especially low-ELO ranked, because it won't be a rush to "ban everything OP NOW". There will be much more strategy in champ select and that should translate into a more strategy-based game.
I guarantee that most of these upvotes on the hate threads are either based on "celebrity bias" on the boards or bandwagoners who don't actually think about the system as a whole. But if you have some sort of counterargument, please share in the comments.
