"Don't respect them" gets said a lot in esports, and it usually comes from trying to reinforce confidence, but over time it starts to blur concepts together. Confidence and arrogance are not the same thing, and attention and respect are not the same thing either, even though they tend to get treated like they are.
Confidence is quieter than people expect. It's built over time and it doesn't need the round to validate it in order to stay intact. Arrogance is more impatient. It decides what the round should look like before it has a chance to unfold, and when it doesn't match that picture, it starts trying to pull it back into something familiar. That's where attention drifts-- you might stop responding to what's actually happening and start reacting to what feels wrong.
Anyone who has played long enough has felt this moment. Someone does something that doesn't line up with how the game is supposed to be played, the timing feels off, the decision looks questionable, and the instinct is to dismiss it. "That's dumb." "That shouldn't work." Yet the round ends for you on the sidelines. The game didn't bend for them, it didn't give them something different, it allowed it within the same constraints you're playing under. If it worked, it existed, regardless of how it looked.
That's where respect comes in, and it has nothing to do with the other team's name or how their players are perceived. It's about the game itself, and the willingness to stay aligned with it even when it doesn't match your expectations. If something keeps working against you, there's something there that hasn't been accounted for yet, and attention has to move toward that instead of defending the version of the round you thought you were playing. Some players won't follow the patterns that were taught, and some won't even understand why what they're doing works, but that doesn't make it random, it just means it's your job to recognize it and plan how to deal with it next time.
There's also a part of this that shows up after the round in comms, when there's a choice between saying what is necessary for your team to win the round and saying something that shifts the blame. It might be small at first, a slight shift in how something is described, or leaving out a detail that puts more of it on you, but over time that habit compounds. You can end up protecting a version of events that feels better instead of one that would help you improve, and that gap doesn't stay in conversation, it shows up again in the next round. Sometimes the best option is saying nothing at all beyond painting the setup clearly for your team, because once the picture is accurate, the why takes care of itself without needing to be forced.
There's a line from John Wooden that holds up here: "Be more concerned with your character than your reputation, because your character is what you really are, while your reputation is merely what others think you are." Confidence sits in that first part and doesn't need immediate confirmation to stay steady. Arrogance sits in the second and starts reaching when the game doesn't agree with it.
Over time, the balance becomes clearer in how decisions are made. When the game presents something that is actually there, attention tightens and it gets taken without hesitation, and when it doesn't, there's no need to force a version of the round that isn't being offered. The game doesn't change based on what you expect from it, but your ability to see it clearly can change everything about how you respond to it, and that's where progress (however small) can come from.
No matter how sharp you are or how much you remember, this game hasn’t happened before. Treat it that way.