100 Thieves fires back at Riot after Valorant team is fined

The esports community was set ablaze when Riot Games imposed a $5,000 penalty against 100 Thieves and suspended their Valorant coach Hector “FrosT” Rosario for alleged non-compliance during the Valorant Champions Tour NA tournament. This decision sparked immediate backlash from the organization and its supporters.

100 Thieves issued a formal rebuttal challenging Riot’s official competitive ruling, asserting they “vehemently oppose” what they describe as Riot’s “inaccurate portrayal” of the events. According to the team’s statement, tournament officials made a server selection that provided Immortals with a distinct competitive edge. Feeling systematically ignored by tournament administration, FrosT reportedly warned officials they were heading toward a “major controversy.”

While acknowledging procedural compliance and accepting the financial penalty, 100 Thieves expressed dismay at what they perceived as excessive escalation and public airing of what should have remained a private administrative matter.

“Our coaching staff was championing player rights and upholding competitive fairness,” the organization’s declaration emphasized.

A statement regarding the VALORANT competitive ruling: pic.twitter.com/EgIZeAIZFv

— 100 Thieves Esports (@100T_Esports) March 23, 2021

100 Thieves escalated their defense by releasing video evidence documenting FrosT’s exchange with tournament officials while players intentionally delayed match commencement. One competitor highlighted the staggering ping disparity—Immortals enjoyed 8ms latency while 100 Thieves suffered over 40ms, creating a substantial competitive imbalance. The footage resonated strongly with Valorant enthusiasts, who praised FrosT’s vigorous defense of his roster and his technical explanation of ping differential significance to Riot representatives.

A video regarding the VALORANT competitive ruling: pic.twitter.com/yM0cldwv8s

— 100 Thieves Esports (@100T_Esports) March 23, 2021

However, Riot remained unswayed by the visual evidence. Following 100 Thieves’ public statement and video release documenting FrosT’s interaction with company officials, VCT NA administrators revised their competitive ruling with a terse declaration that the “issue is resolved.”

We have updated our earlier competitive ruling to provide additional context. Based on the evidence before us, we consider the matter closed. https://t.co/jDO9Q1OCte

— VALORANT Champions Tour NA (@valesports_na) March 24, 2021

Understanding Ping Disparity in Competitive Gaming: A 32ms difference represents more than just numbers—it translates to approximately two extra frames of delay at 60 FPS, creating tangible disadvantages in reaction-based gameplay scenarios common in tactical shooters like Valorant.

The Official Riot Games Perspective

According to Riot’s detailed incident report, both 100 Thieves and Immortals entered the match lobby preparatory to their VCT Masters tournament opening game. Tournament administrators selected a server they believed would provide equitable ping conditions for both squads. When instructed to commence gameplay, 100 Thieves declined participation.

Rather than joining the competitive match, 100 Thieves players deliberately entered the practice range to stall match initiation while FrosT contested server selection with officials. The coach subsequently joined a Discord channel with tournament organizers to continue his server argument, where a Riot Games representative intervened to declare the decision irreversible.

The confrontation persisted for approximately sixty minutes before 100 Thieves ultimately entered the match.

Riot’s documentation states FrosT “threatened to utilize players’ social media influence against both the Tournament Organizer and Riot Games as retaliation.” Company officials characterized his conduct as “violating professional standards” and reiterated that he “made retaliatory threats,” constituting breaches of Riot’s official tournament regulations. 100 Thieves published counter-evidence video challenging allegations against FrosT, but Riot maintained their position regarding his suspension for the season’s remainder. The organization consented to the $5,000 monetary penalty.

Common Tournament Administration Mistakes: Many esports organizations face similar technical disputes, but proper escalation protocols and documentation practices can help resolve issues without public controversy. Understanding proper competitive frameworks is essential for professional teams.

100 Thieves’ public response to Riot represents an unusual instance of an esports entity openly challenging the game developer. Throughout League of Legends competitive history, Riot has consistently exercised authority over participating organizations, compelling team investors to divest ownership or forcibly removing them from the LoL ecosystem entirely. This historical precedent has generally intimidated esports organizations to the extent that Riot faces minimal public opposition.

The organization’s readiness to confront Riot is particularly noteworthy given their status as franchise partners in North America’s premier LoL competition, the LCS. This ensures Riot and 100 Thieves must maintain collaborative relations for the predictable future.

Strategic Considerations for Esports Organizations: When facing similar competitive integrity concerns, teams should consider documenting evidence thoroughly, following established protest protocols, and weighing the long-term relationship implications before public escalation. For comprehensive competitive gaming strategies, consult our complete competitive guide for professional approaches to tournament disputes.

No reproduction without permission：Game Guides Online » 100 Thieves fires back at Riot after Valorant team is fined Analyzing the 100 Thieves vs Riot Games controversy over competitive integrity and ping disputes