I think people actually believe its mostly balanced because they look at swiss results in tournes in a vacuum and see a 40/60 split. Completely ignoring player skill, the impact of sweeps on rounds ect...
Its why I was trying to collect this data in the first place.
From my small sample size (and I'm trying to remember because i am too lazy to look back a few pages) the win rates for LS outside of Splits (which are predominately won by the better player... was something like 75%. Id love to know if other competitive events showed this. If FFG is looking at just total games in a vacuum they might not be seeing the fundamental problem with DS right now.
I don't want to speak for anyone, but the reason I personally think the "LS is soooooo OP" argument is spurious and a touch tiresome isn't because I'm looking at tourney data; it's because in my personal experience, while I've found it harder to win as DS, I haven't been losing 70+% of my DS games, and I haven't found that I get blown out in a majority of my games when I'm playing DS. My DS winrate is lower than LS, sure, but probably 60/40 LS at best, and I'm OK with that. I do wish the DS would get some strong (yes, I'd go so far as to say autoinclude) sets, just to shake up the meta and make LS more of a puzzle again, but besides from the delays lengthening the amount of time between forced innovations, I think the game is in a fine place ATM.