Q&A: Sandbagging Response

Going to be honest, given sandbagging is an actual term, something I didn't realise until I literally just googled it, it doesn't exactly apply here anyway, so for people asking for a catch all phrase, what's wrong with under participation? Yes it's long, but I don't care.

Also when you are saying both sides could be wrong, it is true, but as ever it is with the side suggesting something does happen to provide evidence. If you really want evidence to the contrary, my old guild would enter usually 25 people max to territory war, we missed a few because not enough people would join. Initially we lost a lot until we improved organisation and focused our rosters, then we started to win. Was it because we had fewer people join? Or did the merger we went through followed by a continuation of majority wins with a fuller guild suggest it was something else? We win more than we lose, and we are often the larger guild, for instance this most recent one we had 49 people join and placed 21 teams, suggesting a 7 player difference. We won. We do have less than 50 join every time, but we regularly have to place fewer teams, complain about anecdotal if you like, but there isn't much bias to be had as I've not been looking for either result. There's some evidence, does that mean it isn't a thing now?