Masters London champion misses Champions: Is the VCT points system fair?

When the final whistle of the Masters London final blew, Leviatán made history: a Latin American team crowned at the most prestigious mid-season international tournament. Just weeks later, they learned they would not attend Champions Shanghai – the year-end world championship. That paradox has stirred the Valorant community and raised the question: does the VCT points system truly reward peak performance? To understand the issue, we must look at Riot Games' 2026 tournament structure. VCT splits the season into stages: Kickoff, Stage 1, Stage 2, and Masters. Teams accumulate VCT points based on performance in each stage; the highest total per region earns a Champions berth. There is no automatic spot for the Masters champion. This design encourages consistency throughout the season, rather than a single explosive moment. Leviatán were at a disadvantage from the start. Young star Bruno 'Neon' Rodríguez – later the Masters MVP – could not play in Kickoff due to VCT's age restriction. That absence cost crucial points early. When Stage 2 arrived with a full roster, they made tactical missteps: self-banning Split – a map they were 11-0 on historically – and deviating from their trusted Neon-Phoenix composition. These decisions, according to former pro Sliggy, were the main reasons for their failure to accumulate enough points. VCT Americas is described as 'stacked'. Teams like NRG and G2 Esports maintained consistent form, earning more points than Leviatán. Despite being the Masters champion, Leviatán had only 15 VCT points, far behind the leaders. In a weaker region, 15 points might have secured a Champions spot, but not in the Americas. This exposes a fairness issue between regions – but is it the system's fault or simply a consequence of intense competition? Many argue that the Masters champion deserves an automatic berth. However, from an esports referee's perspective, the current system has its own logic. If given a wildcard, a team could grind only to win one event and then coast, disadvantaging others. Leviatán themselves admitted they deliberately experimented with tactics after securing their Masters spot – a risky but not illegal decision. The mistake was underestimating the region's depth. So what are the lessons? For teams: prioritize early-season points, avoid dependence on an underage star, and do not experiment when Champions qualification is uncertain. For Riot Games: public pressure may force them to consider a special berth for Masters champions, as some LoL tournaments have done. But changing rules mid-season sets a dangerous precedent. Perhaps the solution lies in increasing point bonuses for Masters champions, rather than direct invitations. Champions Shanghai is approaching without Leviatán – a team undoubtedly in the world's top five. This is both a loss for the tournament and a wake-up call for the entire system. The final question is not 'Do Leviatán deserve to be eliminated?', but 'Is the current format protecting the core value: finding the true champion?'. Just as every play needs a slow-motion review, every rule needs real-world verification.