Can we stop pretending that teams signing up for 2 simultaneous events is ok? That's a place to start. You can not play simultaneous LAN events where you have "scheduling conflicts"? How about that? Why are you in two simultaneous LAN events if you can't play both and know you likely need to forfeit some matches in one of them? Answer: Because you know that even if you have to forfeit it won't affect your own chance of going to the major (statistically). This is the reason for whats going on in Asia and it is the reason for what FaZe is doing in EU. Therein lies the gaming of the qualification and that is what should be addressed. How about something like if a team forfeits mid event due to "scheduling conflicts", all past wins and future matches in the event will be turned into forfeit defeats as well? That should do the trick. TYLOO only plan like this because they gamed the system and came to the conclusion that it was net-positive in the current model to act like this. FaZe behaved even worse in my opinion. They straight up knew when entering HLC Belgrade that they couldn't play PGL Bucharest opening matches then and still opted for HLC because the punishment they looked into was not hard enough, we have to assume. Why are they not just given 3 forfeit defeats and the -75 pts or so it would cost them? Why are they allowed by PGL to potentially go net-positive in PGL Bucharest, making it worth for them to take the piss on the other teams behaving ethically correct (in my opinion). I hope changes will come 🙏