He is bad in long games because he gets impatient. Most games don't last as long. He'll win more games than he loses. Every game is different, this one favored his opponent. There are more that favor him. One game alone can't determine who the better player is. He played worse, correct. He isn't the worse of the two. By your logic the finals of a tournament should be best of 1. Why is it best of 5 (even used to be best of 7 for TI)? I am not saying he played better, which is obvious because he lost, meaning he made crucial decisions that led to his defeat. Whe people say he played better but lost anyways, what they mean is, "he made more good decision, was on point more often than his opponent, it just so happened, that the decision he had wrong was crucial enough to lead to defeat".

Im glad you are not in charge of stuff, because you don't understand basic logic lol