Korb3n on TaiLung’s ban: “Half of the ‘threshers’ were banned based on circumstantial evidence”
Team Spirit manager Dmitry “Korb3n” Belov discussed the lifetime ban of LGD Gaming mid laner Santiago Gustavo “TaiLung” Olivos Agüero, and disputed the view that direct evidence is necessary for such decisions.
On the presumption of innocence
[Comment: “The kid is 17 years old, still very young. And now he’s been banned two weeks before the invitational, which naturally made him lose his cool. Moreover, the only direct evidence is a screenshot of a chat about an odd number of kills—that’s it, nothing else. That’s why I believe the presumption of innocence should apply here.”]
And what exactly was he apologizing for? For not going to the in-person event? Well, maybe, but that explanation seems too far-fetched to me.
Half the trashers were banned based on circumstantial evidence—why shouldn’t the presumption of innocence apply to them? :( We need a general unban then
About bans based on circumstantial evidence
[Comment: “Please remind me when a player was banned based on circumstantial evidence.”]
Well, take Koma, for example—he never admitted to 322, and there wasn’t even any chat history there. Just the fact that he logged in using someone else’s account. Nun did the same thing with Aloha in Vega back in the day, though that was more of a gameplay situation.
But Koma received a permanent ban.
Taiga was banned based on the actual chat logs and the evidence they provided. He could have just said he was joking with a friend in the chat instead of admitting to being a compulsive gamer.
In fact, even the most famous ban of Smesha came from a screenshot where he urged a friend to bet on the opponent’s victory.
After that, they noticed unusual activity on the betting line and issued the ban.
So for now, Tailung is following the same pattern: a screenshot of a chat about betting, suspicious activity on the betting line, and then a ban.
About Valve Bans
[Comment: “No, Valve doesn’t ban players at all without direct evidence—if by ‘evidence’ you mean ‘mere suspicion.’” The company takes a pragmatic approach: developers never punish esports players based solely on analysts’ guesses, strange in-game behavior, or the community’s opinion. The confusion arises because Valve strictly distinguishes between the existence of evidence and its publication.”]
Valve hasn’t banned any players at all for the past couple of years, since all qualifiers and such are run by PGL, and there can’t be any cheaters on the platform. That’s why Valve has stopped worrying about it.
It’s not about the separation at all
Earlier, Santiago released a statement regarding his suspension from The International 2026 and PGL tournaments. “If there is concrete evidence against me, I want to know exactly what I’m being accused of, review that evidence, and have the opportunity to respond to it appropriately,” wrote the LGD Gaming midlaner.
Photo: Team Spirit.
