MSI first-round matchups announced; Faker must play in the Play-In. If he advances to the quarterfinals, he will directly face BLG.

Hello everyone, LPL viewers and League of Legends summoners. This is World Game News.

After all the second stage matches across major regions ended, preparations for MSI began quickly. Earlier, MSI announced the first-round rules and match pairings.

As a result, the MSI format caused massive controversy, being questioned by audiences and commentators alike.

If Faker successfully gets through, he will face BLG.

After the previous format reform, MSI's main event uses a full BO5 double-elimination bracket, with more participating teams. The key issue lies in the seeding pool allocation and first-round matchups. This year's seeding pool allocation turned out to be problematic, putting higher-ranked teams at a disadvantage.

As shown in the diagram, Riot divided the eight main event teams into four different seeding pools. Pool 1 contains BLG and G2, Pool 2 contains HLE and LYON, and Pool 3 contains TSW and FURIA.

Finally, Pool 4 consists of TES and the team that emerges from the Play-In.

Notice that T1 is not among these pools. The reason is simple: T1 must participate in the Play-In, competing with three other play-in teams for one main event spot.

Then comes the most absurd part: if Faker manages to qualify, his first-round opponent is confirmed to be BLG, because Pool 1 faces Pool 4, and Pool 2 faces Pool 3. Consequently, LPL's second seed TES will face G2 in the first round, a direct clash of powerhouses.

Meanwhile, HLE becomes the biggest winner, as the teams in Pools 2 and 3 are clearly weaker in strength.

Unreasonable seeding allocation draws complaints from casters.

After the seeding pools were announced, immediate controversy erupted. Many Western casters criticized the allocation, noting that Riot's standard used only the results of the First Stand tournament to determine seeding pools, completely ignoring historical regional performance and achievements.

Because LPL and LEC performed best at First Stand, their champion teams are placed in Pool 1. Then the champion teams from the third and fourth regions are in Pool 2, while Pool 3 contains champions from other regions.

Pool 4 contains the second seeds from the LPL and LCK. In other words, according to Riot's logic, the second seeds from the LPL and LCK are considered weaker than the first seeds from the weakest region.

Under this allocation logic, the teams that performed well at First Stand actually gain no benefit. BLG will likely face T1, G2 will have to play TES, while HLE becomes the biggest beneficiary, as the teams in Pools 2 and 3 are clearly weaker.

In summary, Riot essentially arranged top-tier matchups in the first round, thereby favoring the weaker regions.

Under these matchups, among the MSI title favorites, the team with the easiest path is HLE. For BLG and T1, if they want to win the championship, they may have to play three elite matches. For example, if BLG beats T1 in the first round, they would then face HLE. If the LCK teams remain strong, HLE and T1 could potentially climb back up, leading to another clash.

Editor

T1's scenario is similar: to win the title they would need to play three top-tier matches. HLE, however, has a different path: a relaxed first round, then facing the winner of TES vs G2 in the second round, and possibly meeting BLG or T1 only in the third round.

Personally, I believe this format arrangement is definitely unreasonable. The core issue is that the top-ranked regions do not enjoy the advantages they deserve. In previous tournament setups, Pool 1 teams were usually weaker ones.

Editor

Under these circumstances, the LPL must be prepared to face high-intensity matches from the start. The LPL's biggest issue in the past has been slow starts at international events. This time, the LPL must overcome that tendency; otherwise, losing the first game would put immense pressure on them. I hope TES and BLG can prepare well and aim for a strong opening victory.