Note: Numbers in red are "live"/yet to be decided as current major is still ongoing. The absolute minimum possible earned value is placed there for now as a placeholder.
There's been a significant uproar over the past few weeks on how the heavy emphasis on regional DPC points is problematic. I anecdotally thought it made sense, but thought I'd take a quick mathematical look at it (3 minute spreadsheet linked above).
In summary, even in a world where regional points don't exist, the relative amount of major points earned actually lines up pretty closely with the direct invites. In fact, the region that's been complaining the most about getting screwed out of slots due to this format, EU, is actually getting "more slots" than it's earned from its performance these 2 majors. The only significant impact of the regional DPC points emphasis is that SEA has "lost" a slot to SA because of the impact of the regional qualifiers (because the top SA teams in the region are consistent whereas the top SEA teams in the region are not).
I also did a breakdown on each region's relative performance by slot; I also did a breakdown by seeding as well. As a whole, NA is the most "efficient" DPC point earning region, likely because it doesn't have extra low-performing slots, while CIS is the least efficient, closely followed by EU.
Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/DotA2/comments/nyc4km/statistical_analysis_on_the_allocation_of_dpc/
