Competitive Power Rankings: What's your take?
4 weeks have passed since the start of the competitive season and while it has been a rather interesting turn of events, one thing continues to be the top of my mind. We come off of 8.1 and that assortment of oddities and I found myself more or less surprised by how competitive regions turned out and the matter on how power rankings have been and could be gauged.
I've stumbled across the ESPN articles (and I still don't know why) and they have usually had me questioning the metrics they run their rankings by because it certainly doesn't look like "current strength of a team." Yeah I know it's hard to measure cross region. And because of that difficulty, I feel that it's less significant to utilize that cross region factor until playoffs and international competitions near. One of my biggest opinions on power ranking would be a statement I made a few days ago on a Discord group of mine:
>I understand Korea is the strongest competitive region and such. But in a global power ranking, why should it take a non-Korean team to need perfect macro per role and have to nearly perfect game teams consistently in order to be anywhere in the discussion of a top 5 team if even that? And even then, should it really matter of the history and the who-beats-whom factor until it's actually a possibility?
If you had to ask me, I'd be gauging my power rankings by the following: 10% on its region (not vs other regions), 30% Team Trajectory (including the players and track record), and the remaining 60% on the actual performance on stage against the week's opponents with little forbearance on the future performances. As for the best of series differences: that's a rough one. So far I've just gauged by a collective average best on the series. Basically with a three game series for the winning team, I would condense the key points to each game into one grade with a positive lean depending on the grade. Confusing? Yeah. I've still got work to do with it.
To me, struggling teams don't get a spike in rankings the moment a clean 2-0 week happens. That goes vice versa with a shaky week for a high end team. I'll normally look and give the team one or two weeks to prove their place. Did that with CLG - going down now. WE - down slowly. SKT - Was like low 30s in a mock ranking I did prior to week 4. They're going up quite a bit but I want more convincing results, especially in their top and jungler, before I make any high table assumptions. Yeah. I'm kind of strict but I'm not crazy.
As the title says though: I've wondered what others take is on how they would rank teams locally or globally? Maybe my way of thinking is flawed. I'd like to know what I should look at more should I ever attempt to make a global ranking as someone who watches as much as I can.
