“You need to be a degenerate to win this game, I’m sorry”. Puppey’s sincere talk on what it takes to be good at Dota 2, and being the only player attending every TIExclusive

Following Team Secret’s hard-fought qualification for The International 2022, we sat down with legendary captain Clement “Puppey” Ivanov to explore the psychological and strategic dimensions of their journey. The veteran leader shared profound insights about their match against Virtus.pro, the strategic impact of adding Resolut1on to their lineup, and the unconventional requirements for achieving excellence in competitive Dota 2.

— Your path to TI11 qualification spanned multiple challenging phases including DPC seasons, roster adjustments, and the Last Chance qualifier. Which segment presented the greatest difficulty?

— Objectively speaking, the initial period of the competitive calendar proved most demanding. Honestly, every phase presented its own distinct obstacles [chuckles]. We experienced significant setbacks during both seasonal campaigns, necessitating multiple personnel changes as some members departed while others required replacement. Nothing about the process felt straightforward or simple. The entire competitive year demanded constant adaptation and resilience from our organization.

— Your series versus Virtus.pro proved particularly challenging, especially the opening game. Who initiated the decisive throne push call?

— Absolutely, those matches presented substantial challenges. Frankly, we were positioned to drop the initial contest. GPK’s Aghanim’s Scepter acquisition severely disrupted our strategic execution. Indeed, I made the throne push decision. It represented one of those high-pressure situations where consensus about the optimal play remained uncertain, but the circumstances demanded decisive action regardless.

I anticipated we would inflict more substantial structural damage, though ultimately the outcome proved acceptable. Perhaps I calculated that when their heroes began respawning, the Ancient’s health would already be substantially reduced, creating a more favorable position for our team. However, I believed we needed to pursue a game-winning maneuver. Given my character’s power spike at that moment, the choice became clear: execute the outplay, secure the victory—that’s the fundamental nature of high-stakes Dota.

— What factors contributed to your confidence in calling the throne push?

— Their Undying hero lacked buyback availability while remaining deceased for an extended duration. The crucial consideration was their inability to effectively initiate against our positioning with high probability. Their delayed respawn timing combined with our Sniper’s Double Damage rune activation clearly justified the throne push strategy. I wouldn’t have considered this approach without the DD buff. Multiple favorable conditions aligned to enable this aggressive endgame strategy.

— From your professional perspective, what represent Virtus.pro’s primary strengths and vulnerabilities?

— We capitalized on their preference for specific support hero archetypes. Honestly, we remained uncertain whether they would adapt their drafting approach against us. The possibility existed for them to select somewhat different compositions that could have disadvantaged our strategy. However, they opted for comfort picks, and I believe their comfort zone became their strategic liability. Their predictable drafting patterns simplified our counter-strategy development significantly.

I suspect the reverse scenario would yield similar commentary: had they emerged victorious, they would have offered comparable observations about our team. I don’t perceive numerous distinct weaknesses or strengths—rather, it’s about whose strategic concepts prove superior, with the better-prepared team typically prevailing.

— Why did integrating Resolut1on into your lineup produce such immediate positive results? Does his resource-intensive approach complement Crystallis’s style, or were other factors involved?

— The most significant factor in Resolut1on’s successful integration stems from Zayac’s established comfort playing alongside him. This foundation immediately enhances our laning phase effectiveness and facilitates clearer communication about lane assignments. The previous combination involving iceiceice and Zayac lacked that natural synchronization. Even earlier roster configurations demonstrated insufficient player chemistry and cohesion. Competitive teams fundamentally require that unified bonding and mutual understanding.

With Resolut1on and Zayac’s existing friendship combined with my Russian language comprehension, our team environment became substantially more cohesive. That represents the critical element—when your team lacks complete alignment or cannot communicate effectively… The connection must develop organically.

Attempting to force cohesion typically proves ineffective. I recognize that organizations might implement psychological interventions for players struggling to mesh, but such approaches often feel artificial. Natural team synergy typically produces superior results because squads that genuinely connect psychologically tend to achieve victory.

— Do Last Chance qualification victories generate more intense emotional responses compared to previous direct invitations?

— Honestly, I find it intriguing how my TI qualification pathways have consistently varied throughout my career. I’ve navigated open qualifiers, regional qualifiers, and now this newly established Last Chance route—I’ve essentially experienced every possible Dota qualification method. Despite not maintaining consistent top-tier performance, I persistently qualify for The International through diverse methods, reminiscent of a determined rodent. It’s amusing. I’m still processing the reality of this qualification given its recent occurrence. Certainly, I feel satisfaction, though the full emotional impact hasn’t completely registered yet.

— What specific areas received primary focus during your preparation and boot camp phases? In-game mechanics, strategic development, psychological conditioning?

— Our attention encompassed all competitive dimensions. Providing a single definitive answer proves impossible. You concentrate on mental fortitude, strategic philosophy, practical execution, drafting strategies… Every element interconnects with others. Dota’s fundamental characteristic involves persistent issues emerging beyond your control sphere. Consider scenarios where you consecutively lose ten practice matches, or achieve ten consecutive victories. Both situations demand careful psychological management and strategic evaluation.

Even maintaining a ten-game winning streak doesn’t necessarily indicate superior capability. Such patterns might instead signal progression along suboptimal strategic pathways. The competitive landscape contains numerous deceptive elements. Ultimately, comprehending optimal Dota decision-making represents the most crucial competency, though articulating the precise methodology for achieving this understanding proves exceptionally challenging. The comprehension typically develops through accumulated experience rather than explicit instruction.

— You maintained your distinction as the sole competitor participating in every International event. Does this hold personal significance, or simply represents another statistical achievement?

— Certainly, this milestone carries meaning for me. Consistent TI participation remains important. It demonstrates my sustained capacity to qualify for The International, which represents positive professional validation. I’ve dedicated extensive time to this game throughout my career. Reflecting historically, I competed in Dota 1 originally. That journey commenced approximately six years before transitioning to Dota 2, possibly seven, with TI1 occurring in 2011—amounting to nearly two decades of Dota involvement at this stage.

And maintaining this level proves demanding, because periods occur where my performance substantially declines. This creates frustration, because I recognize that at age eighteen, I would dominate current competition. However, the competitive landscape has transformed significantly. Perhaps not eighteen—I’ll concede nineteen years old. Then the outcome becomes inevitable: superior performance against all challengers. However, sustaining consistent excellence presents formidable challenges.

— But you maintain elite performance.

— No, I do not. Because enduring constant performance pressure demands tremendous psychological resources. Achieving excellence temporarily then returning later proves relatively straightforward. I mean, abandoning Dota completely remains impossible, that’s certain. However, pursuing skill development when performing poorly feels more manageable. The complication arises because I’ve previously attained peak performance. So when your capabilities decline, identifying the root causes proves elusive. You tend to generate inadequate self-justifications: insufficient practice commitment, aging factors, or underperforming teammates, despite your individual competence.

Perhaps competitive drive diminishes, perhaps achievement hunger fades. All these potential explanations, you understand. And resurrecting your previous performance level presents extreme difficulty. Because the game undergoes constant evolution. And believing “if I simply maintain relentless effort and proper mental focus, everything will resolve” doesn’t consistently produce results. I don’t believe the situation remains identical when your signature heroes receive substantial nerfs forcing strategic adaptation.

The metagame evolves continuously, roster changes introduce additional complexity: emerging talent enters the scene and fundamentally transforms the competitive environment, requiring your adaptation to them rather than their adjustment to you. Maintaining elite Dota player status demands continuous psychological and strategic recalibration. Perhaps this represents an esports-specific phenomenon, perhaps not—who can determine definitively.

— So did you experience these self-justification patterns throughout your professional journey?

— Absolutely, I encountered them. I characterize them as inadequate excuses because proper focus should remain entirely self-directed, to be honest. And I believe external factors will naturally align with your development. However, avoiding objective reality proves impossible. When you’re performing reasonably well and external parties approach questioning “why do you continue playing with this individual?”, it psychologically disrupts your concentration. Because you intend to maintain self-focus, but the external environment constantly surrounds you with opinions and perspectives, making sustained self-concentration genuinely challenging.

Frequently, when you concentrate exclusively on self-improvement, you’re not necessarily supporting teammates adequately. Alternatively, perhaps your teammates underperform, but now your attention must shift toward their development. This generates substantial psychological strain. The approach might prove ineffective, players could become irritated by your attempted influence imposition. I believe every experienced Dota 2 competitor recognizes when situations deteriorate—you sense the psychological burden intensity, the mental weight becomes exceptionally heavy.

Who spends the most money in OG? Who doesn’t flush the toilet? We’ve played Team Bingo with bzm and Taiga to learn these things

We lack established guidance structures. Nobody truly comprehends the game more profoundly than active competitors. So seeking external direction presents inherent difficulties. If your team underperforms, you essentially possess no alternative sources for consultation.

Consider traditional sports: with underperforming Polish football squads, you can consult experienced coaches asking “What do you perceive as the primary issues here?”. However, frequently when attempting this methodology within Dota and esports generally, individuals lack substantive insights to offer. They’ll provide superficial commentary. Or they maintain biases, certainly. You’ll never obtain genuinely accurate competitive intelligence. The only individuals possessing meaningful answers are current champions. And champions never disclose that information.

— You represent the most experienced competitor at this International. Do you perceive this distinction? What guidance do you provide younger teammates and what insights do they offer you?

— No instructional content exists. I’m aged! I don’t provide instruction anymore. I no longer comprehend youthful perspectives. I confront my own professional challenges. When you age, then I can offer perspective. However, during my early career, I simply concentrated on gameplay while constantly desiring reduced team complications—though that inevitability persists, that’s the fundamental issue. When joining a new organization and expecting perfect conditions, that represents flawed psychological approach, I believe. However simultaneously, your perspective contains validity. The experience should feel positive and systems should function optimally.

No definitive advice exists. Simply maintain physical health, realistically speaking. Honestly, competitive gaming demonstrates extreme addictiveness and frequently prevents engagement with beneficial life activities. However conversely, reflecting five years prior, when managing excessive real-world responsibilities, my sole objective for performance improvement involved playing Dota exclusively while disregarding everything else, similar to current young professionals.

You must embrace degenerate behavior to achieve victory in this game, I apologize. You require unhealthy dedication, practically speaking. You cannot defeat competitors maintaining unhealthy lifestyles. Articulating this concept proves challenging. Individuals practicing healthy lifestyles frequently don’t represent elite Dota competitors. Regular sleep schedules and similar practices feel somewhat peculiar. I’m uncertain whether I appreciate this reality, but it represents objective truth. Simply pursue whatever brings satisfaction. That represents the complete requirement.

INSaNiA: “We were five very strong players. But we were a pretty bad team”

The journey of maintaining competitive relevance in Dota 2 presents unique psychological hurdles that intensify over time. When performance dips occur, veterans face amplified frustration knowing their younger selves possessed superior mechanical execution. This creates a unique form of cognitive dissonance where past achievements contrast sharply with current struggles.

— But you are consistently performing at a high level.

— That perception doesn’t match reality. The expectation to deliver peak performance consistently generates immense mental strain. Achieving greatness temporarily proves significantly easier than sustaining it across multiple competitive seasons and meta transformations.

Transitioning from aspiring amateur to established professional fundamentally alters motivation dynamics. The hunger that fueled initial success often diminishes once major milestones are reached, creating motivational voids that are notoriously difficult to fill.

When established players experience skill regression, they encounter distinct psychological barriers. Unlike newcomers who can attribute struggles to inexperience, veterans must confront the unsettling reality that their proven capabilities have somehow eroded.

This triggers defensive cognitive patterns where players manufacture unconvincing justifications for their decline. Common rationalizations include insufficient practice time, aging reflexes, or team chemistry issues—all while knowing the core issue lies within their own performance.

— So did you experience these rationalization patterns throughout your competitive journey?

— Absolutely, everyone does. I categorize them as inadequate explanations because genuine improvement requires focusing exclusively on personal performance factors. External circumstances will naturally align when individual execution reaches the required standard.

However, completely insulating yourself from external opinions proves practically impossible in the hyper-connected esports environment. When outsiders question your roster decisions or strategic approaches, it creates cognitive interference that disrupts concentration.

Exclusive self-focus creates additional complications in team environments. Sometimes teammates genuinely require guidance, but attempting to provide it often generates resentment and additional stress layers.

Rebuilding confidence after performance slumps presents monumental challenges in constantly evolving competitive landscapes. The game undergoes continuous transformation through balance patches, new hero introductions, and item reworks that fundamentally alter strategic approaches.

When signature heroes receive significant nerfs, players must completely re-evaluate their gameplay foundations rather than simply increasing practice intensity.

Roster changes introduce additional complexity layers. New talent often reshapes team dynamics unilaterally—established players must adapt to newcomers rather than expecting reciprocal adjustment.

The esports domain lacks established guidance frameworks that traditional sports have developed over decades. When teams underperform, few reliable resources exist for obtaining constructive feedback.

Traditional sports benefit from institutional knowledge transfer systems where experienced coaches and former players provide perspective. In football, struggling teams can consult veterans who’ve navigated similar challenges across different eras.

Attempting similar consultation approaches in Dota 2 typically yields unreliable information. Either respondents lack sufficient understanding or bring inherent biases that distort their assessments.

The only individuals possessing genuinely valuable insights are current top performers. However, competitive advantages create strong disincentives for sharing strategic innovations or team management insights.

— As the most experienced competitor at The International, do you feel that age distinction? What wisdom do you impart to younger teammates and what do they teach you?

— Genuine mentorship proves increasingly difficult across generational divides. The gaming mindset and lifestyle priorities differ substantially between age cohorts.

There exists no universal advice beyond maintaining basic health fundamentals. Gaming inherently promotes addictive engagement patterns that frequently conflict with balanced lifestyle choices.

Paradoxically, peak competitive performance often demands lifestyle choices that contradict conventional wellness advice. Those maintaining strict health regimens frequently struggle to match the dedication levels of players who sacrifice everything for the game.

This creates an uncomfortable reality where optimal performance correlates with certain unhealthy behaviors. The key lies in identifying personal balance points rather than adhering to external standards.

No reproduction without permission：SeeYouSoon Game Club » “You need to be a degenerate to win this game, I’m sorry”. Puppey’s sincere talk on what it takes to be good at Dota 2, and being the only player attending every TIExclusive Checking where the TI11 players live.