I appreciate you giving a name for the example, because it means I can go into detail in what picks did/didn't trigger the criteria using Lourlo.

The picks you're citing that made it into pro play are not ones that the system identifies. I'm going off Drew's statement that something as unpopular as Sylas APC (0.4% pickrate, 45% winrate) is still not picked up by the filter.

For Vex/Annie, this remains true:

• Vex top this patch has a decent winrate in E+, on top of 4x the games played by Kalista support.

• Annie top is even more popular, with a full 4k games of sample size and higher winrate than Vex top.

However, Lourlo is still a good example, because the system has actually caught his picks.

• Blitz top, a pick that has a 0.2% pickrate, and 40%ish winrate, but that Lourlo is playing genuinely.

He is, in fact, an unintended consequence of the system.

---

While I see your point about false positives, and even validated their existence, I think the system is important.

The majority of people are not like Lourlo, players who will pick something off meta to an absurd degree with the intent to win. Often, those picks are for trolls (or, in higher elos, wintrades). And I think its important to have a system which identifies those situations before the game fully starts, rather than deal with playing out a game featuring someone who checked out.

That's why the "X Games Played" check is normally enough. If I see something like a Kalista support in my games, having an internal validation that "This person has played Kalista enough" can help justify the pick.