Last November, T1, led by Lee "Faker" Sang-hyeok, won their fifth Worlds trophy. The win was not all about Faker, though. It also marked the second Worlds win for and the end of the historic “ZOFGK” roster (Zeus-Oner-Faker-Gumayusi-Keria, for those that don’t know). T1’s struggles earlier in the year — the losses to Gen G, the narrow fourth-seed qualification for Worlds — quickly became a distant memory. 

But just how did T1 go from almost not qualifying for Worlds to winning the whole thing? To take a closer look at T1’s win, we partnered with SAP to take a data-forward, analytical look at their style. Let’s see how, from their incredible individual performances and consistent snowballing across the map to their laneswaps and baron setups, T1 stole the show on the rift and on the charts. 

T1: Clean. Quick. Consistent. 

For one thing, T1 started most of their games with leads — and kept that lead throughout. T1 won 13 games at Worlds, and they were leading at 14 minutes in 12 of them — they only had to come back from a deficit once, and they only failed to convert a 14-minute gold lead once. That’s not just impressive consistency, it’s near infallibility. 

Bilibili Gaming (BLG) — T1’s opponents in the finals — were similarly dominant throughout the tournament. Of teams with more than 5 games ahead at 14 minutes, T1 had the highest winrate conversion at Worlds, closely followed by BLG (11 out of 12 and 10 out of 11 respectively). T1 and BLG were also the only teams to win every time they successfully took Baron. 

BLG’s stats can’t be compared directly to T1’s, though. While both teams defeated similarly difficult opponents in the same number of games in the bracket stage, BLG played an extra round in the Swiss stage, and their overall strengths of schedule were far less comparable. 

Tied with Gen.G (GEN) for the lowest Combined Kills per Minute — despite the lowest Average Game Time — of any team with more than 5 games at Worlds, T1 won their games long before they could even display their absurd mechanics in late game team fights. They also found larger leads than anyone else, boasting the highest Gold Difference at 15 at the tournament. But they weren’t just playing the early game better than everyone else — they were playing it differently.

For example, while they didn’t take the first tower more often than any other team (in fact, teams like GEN, G2, and TES claimed the first tower in wins more often than T1), T1 had the highest rate of plates claimed of any team at Worlds. Their laneswap setups — which we’ll take a closer look at soon — created consistent leads on both sides of the map, outpacing their opponents everywhere. 

T1 also prioritized parts of the map differently than other top teams. Though stats like Average Void Grub control and First Drake control are expected to normalize for teams that played more games — especially when filtered by results — T1’s data still stands out. BLG, with a similar number of games, is the best comparison point: In wins, T1 emphasized Grubs control (61%) far more than BLG (51%), and, conversely, prioritized securing the First Drake (54%) far less than BLG (85%).

If T1’s performance is the benchmark, then start pinging your solo queue teams to take Grubs as soon as possible — if you’re as good as T1, it’s a winning formula..

‍

Lane swap masterclass 

All of this points to a clear formula for lane swap games, and it wasn’t a secret: Use the new lane dynamic to secure Grubs, pump turret plate gold into Gumayusi, and then win. To take a closer look at how well it worked, and what T1 did differently than other teams, we’re going to look at their Gold Lead, XP Lead, and Proximity data in lane swap and non-lane-swap games to compare them to the other Worlds teams. 

For the following analysis, lane swap games are defined as games where one of the ADCs hits the top tower before the bot tower — with G2, MAD, PSG, and PAIN excluded, since they played less than 3 lane swap games at Worlds. Naturally, with lane swaps being such a prominent part of the Worlds meta, T1 had more lane swap games than the teams they’re being compared to. With deft analysis, though, T1’s clearly defined lane swap strategy is still easy to see in their stats. 

Certain obvious patterns jump out of the data immediately — teams like GAM and PSG, rely on carry top laners (Kiaya and Azhi) and saw significantly higher jungle proximity in lane swap games (+4 and +5, respectively). FLY, on the other hand, tended to leave Bwipo on an island, with Inspired spending far less time in proximity to his top laner in lane swap games (-6). 

The same pattern holds true on the other side of the map: teams like BLG, WBG, and LNG demanded far more jungle attention for their ADCs in lane swap games (+6, +7, and a whopping +11, respectively). In lane swap wins hile Gumayusi averaged a higher gold lead at 14 minutes than any of these players — 816 compared to 588, 378, and 362, respectively. Despite that, Oner’s proximity to him only increased slightly (+2) in lane swap games. And that didn’t mean that Oner was spending more time with Zeus, either — Oner’s proximity to his top laner remained unchanged in lane swap games. 

(For more details on just how T1 manages lane swaps, check out Yamato Cannon’s break down.)

The statistical key to understanding this unexpected dynamic comes from ADC-to-ADC proximity in lane swaps. Generally, the team initiating the swap hopes to move their ADC away from a losing matchup to take advantage of an easy lane to scale against the enemy top laner. Gumayusi’s most played champions at Worlds, though, were Ashe, Xayah, Caitlyn, Kalista, and Jhin — most of the time, especially when paired with Keria’s infamous lane-dominant ranged support pool, these champions are the ones being swapped away from. 

For that reason, of the top 8 teams at Worlds, T1 was one of the most willing — alongside WBG — to match the enemy ADC in swaps (-9 and -7 proximity in swaps, respectively). Players like LNG GALA and HLE Viper, on the other hand preferred to use the breathing room from lane swaps to scale up safely as far from the enemy ADC as they could (-29 and -26 proximity in swaps, respectively). By chasing the enemy ADC around the map and forcing them to play out a losing 2v2 matchup — with better macro, map control, and movement — Gumayusi and Keria built up massive gold leads in lane swap games with less jungle attention than normal.

Overall, T1 had some of the biggest bot lane gold differences at 14 in the tournament (ADC: 666 and Support: 439), but both averages jumped significantly in lane swap games. In lane swap games, Keria averaged the second-highest GD14 on the team — 615. He’s always stood out for his unique style as a gold-hungry, high-impact support and that style shined at Worlds. 

For most teams, lane swaps change the distribution of resources in the laning phase for the side lanes, with top and bot laners trading gold and XP across the map. With his bot laners looking to match the enemy bot lane 2v2 as much as possible, though, Zeus could stabilize — his average lane swap GD14 in wins (569) was the same as his GD14 in wins overall. Nothing comes 

without a cost, though. With their fiery side lanes taking advantage of their mechanical dominance in lane swaps, Faker and Oner were the ones who lost out. 

In wins, Faker averaged a 451 GD14. In lane swap wins, he averaged 177 GD14 — nearly a kill’s worth of gold deficit. Oner was a similar story, going from an overall average 473 gold lead to a 295 gold lead in lane swaps. Objective control and turret plates around the map can create a lot of holes, even with T1’s revered early-game tempo. In lane swap games, Faker and Oner sacrificed their individual leads to patch them. 

The T1 Baron 

During the “ZOFGK” roster’s three-year tyranny over League of Legends, the “T1 Baron” became something of a legend. Any time any team starts a risky Baron, tries to sneak Baron with the enemy team alive, or just stands around Baron in the middle of the game, we hear casters and analysts invoke the mythical “T1 Baron.” 

Over the last few years,  T1 has been  notorious for pushing the pace of play around the Baron pit, exploiting gaps in tempo to secure Barons on timers that would — conventionally — be considered illegal. 

One of the best and most infamous examples of the “T1 Baron” comes from their series against Gen G in the Semifinals. With all five enemy players alive and at a 1.6k gold deficit, right as the enemy Skarner begins to secure the Soul point dragon for his team, T1 clears vision in the Baron pit and starts burning it before GEN realizes what’s happening. Taking Baron shreds your resists, erodes your health bars, and burns your cooldowns — on paper, the GEN should easily be able to punish an attempt like this. 

In the end, though, T1 was more decisive. Right as the Baron dies, Faker, Oner, Keria, and Gumayusi threw their ultimates at Chovy, who was hovering a little too close — and the fight was over before “Blue team has slain Baron Nashor” could even pop up on screen. These Barons weren’t just a product of T1’s uncanny ability to identify holes in enemy macro that no one else could take advantage of. The “T1 Baron” would only work if all five players fought decisively and to mechanical perfection. 

Looking at T1’s Baron stats and control rate is informative, but skewed heavily in comparison to other teams by their relative dominance throughout the tournament — the team was rarely in

losing positions, after all. It’s no surprise that they’d boast one of the higher Baron control rates and earliest Baron secure timers, considering their winrate with a low average game time. 

Instead, SAP has allowed us to look at data about T1’s Baron starts — attempts to leash Baron that provoke a reaction from the enemy team. If they do nothing, T1 walks away with Baron. On the other hand, picking a fight with T1 at the Baron pit never seems to go well for anybody. 

For all of the mystique around T1’s Baron setups — much of which was earned during much shakier domestic performances and at earlier tournaments — Worlds 2024 didn’t live up to the theoretical “T1 Baron.” In line with their consistently dominant midgame statistics, T1 had the highest average gold lead when hitting Baron for the first time of the top eight teams (4003 Gold). In terms of their average timer when first hitting Baron, T1 was pretty normal for a top-eight team — around 24 minutes. TES averaged around 22 minutes, a good distance from the rest of the pack, indicating slightly more dominant wins and earlier snowballing. 

What made T1’s Barons unique didn’t come down to the timing they hit Baron, even though they’re associated with early Barons, or their general Gold leads when looking to secure Baron — it was a willingness to start the objective in positions where no one else would. 

At Worlds, T1 hit Baron with everyone on the enemy team alive seven times, four of which were without a significant gold lead. While only two resulted in a successful Baron sneak, they still create immense pressure on the map — usually, at minimum, teams hope to force out an enemy teleport or ultimate to open up space for other plays on the map. Conventionally, these are plays designed to snowball a lead and force your opponents to choose between bad options. T1 used the play in a new way, and they did so repeatedly throughout Worlds. 

In every aspect of the game — from lane swaps to Baron sneaks — T1’s ZOFGK roster has been one of the most beloved, iconic, and charismatic teams in League history. Statistically, their unique style jumped off the page in everything they did; the key to their dominance — on and off the Rift — was an undeterred commitment to a style that almost no one else could execute. The only roster in LoL history to raise two Worlds trophies without any changes gave us an unforgettable last dance. After repeatedly facing elimination domestically and scraping into Worlds as the fourth seed, T1 risked it all for a completely unique style — and they won.

‍