|
Same rules apply, per usual. Please use the appropriate threads (QQ, Brag, Champion, etc) whenever appropriate. Keep the resident Banling content.
Thanks. Happy Gaming. |
Elo hell is for some people anywhere, for some nowhere. It's a place that you think you don't belong in - you think your skilllevel is higher than that of your teammates/opponents, and so you believe that you belong to a higher ELO. Some people will think this regardless of where they are, some people acknowledge their mistakes and realize that instead of bitching about something that only exists in your mind, they work on getting better
|
On March 20 2012 00:50 Two_DoWn wrote:
Unfortunately, the only mod we have is asleep. or something. And apparently no other mods bother coming here, even if you send reports.
I was about to mention the lack of flowers in this post and how I was disappointed after I hoped to see you post in the previous page, but then I realized that would look far too much like some 4chan post, so I'll restrain.
Still, I enjoyed the pretty pictures.
|
On March 20 2012 01:07 Juicyfruit wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 01:06 robertdinh wrote:On March 20 2012 01:04 ManyCookies wrote:
That is EXACTLY a snide remark. Even the "civil" discussion is marred with it. Yea I find it humorous how people always assume that just because someone is the minority in a certain belief they must be wrong, yet often it is the majority that make the snide remarks and try to poke fun at the minority. Innovators are a minority. Apparently believing in Elo hell is the minority now?
In this particular context it obviously is. Since people are trying to argue that the system is pretty accurate.
|
Honestly, the people that whine about "elo hell" just seem like bad players. Everyone jokes about it time to time when they get in a really bad string of games with really bad teammates, but if you start to take it seriously then I just don't know what to tell you. It reminds me of those delusional people that played BW that were forever stuck in D+ but always tried to lie about their true level and make up the most bizarre excuses as to why they're stuck in their level (Terran too hard, Protoss OP, ZvZ is retarded, fucking cheesers, etc.).
|
On March 20 2012 01:13 koreasilver wrote:
Honestly, the people that whine about "elo hell" just seem like bad players. Everyone jokes about it time to time when they get in a really bad string of games with really bad teammates, but if you start to take it seriously then I just don't know what to tell you. It reminds me of those delusional people that played BW that were forever stuck in D+ but always tried to lie about their true level and make up the most bizarre excuses as to why they're stuck in their level (Terran too hard, Protoss OP, ZvZ is retarded, fucking cheesers, etc.).
Hey koreasilver, the problem is 1v1 games aren't the same as solo queue ranking in a 5v5 game.
|
Honestly, the people that whine about "elo hell" just seem like bad players
Since people are trying to argue that the system is pretty accurate.
Shit like this completely un-constructive. The first one is just an insult. The second is information we're all already aware of, with a completely pointless insinuation that they're wrong. Stop it.
If you want to actually go somewhere with this, do some god damn binomial calculations, plug in some numbers (win rates, number of games, etc.), see the percentage of players who would be expected to win 50% games or less. It doesn't have to be a perfect model (Ice Cream) to see general trends or if the numbers are in the ballpark of significance.
http://www.stat.tamu.edu/~west/applets/binomialdemo.html
Here, I'll do a few:
55% win chance, 50 games. 19% of people 50% or below.
55% win chance, 100 games. 13% below.
55% win chance, 150 games. 9.3% below.
55% win chance, 200 games. 6.8% below.
55% win chance, roughly 260 games. 5% below or 2 SD.
60% win chance, roughly 55 games. 5% below or 2SD.
65% win chance (2:1 win ratio), roughly 20 games. 5% below or 2 SD.
60% win chance, 100 games. 2.7% below.
60% win chance, 150 games. .5% chance.
I'm calling 5% of players stuck as a "significant" amount. As the win ratio increases (1:1, 1.22:1, 1.5:1, and ~2:1), the stuck rate goes down pretty damn fast. Is it likely you're get stuck? No, and most people claiming that are full of shit. Is there a significant amount of players who are expected to be stuck for a decently large amount of games? Yes.
Any questions?
|
On March 20 2012 01:12 robertdinh wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 01:07 Juicyfruit wrote:On March 20 2012 01:06 robertdinh wrote:On March 20 2012 01:04 ManyCookies wrote:
That is EXACTLY a snide remark. Even the "civil" discussion is marred with it. Yea I find it humorous how people always assume that just because someone is the minority in a certain belief they must be wrong, yet often it is the majority that make the snide remarks and try to poke fun at the minority. Innovators are a minority. Apparently believing in Elo hell is the minority now? In this particular context it obviously is. Since people are trying to argue that the system is pretty accurate.
I don't think people DO believe it's particularly accurate, just that on a rough scale it's accurate ENOUGH. Not a single bloody person here claimed that Elo system is perfect, but it sure is accurate enough that an 1800 player will not get stuck in 1400 range for long.
On March 20 2012 00:56 robertdinh wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 00:55 TheKefka wrote:On March 20 2012 00:53 robertdinh wrote:
I'm baffled, are you guys telling me that just because this is a very debatable issue, that you get frustrated seeing talk of it here? Why get that worked up over it, aside from 1 poster a while ago, no one is being very inflammatory, it is pretty civil. Do uninflammatory discussions really distress you that much? There is not constructive discussion when it comes to a topic like elo hell. I guess... what constitutes a constructive discussion though ya know? Like to me if I can get even 1 person to not deal in absolutes anymore and understand that not everyone has the same experiences in solo queue and some do get stuck at a lower elo than they should be, then i've made progress. Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 00:56 Juicyfruit wrote:On March 20 2012 00:53 robertdinh wrote:
I'm baffled, are you guys telling me that just because this is a very debatable issue, that you get frustrated seeing talk of it here? Why get that worked up over it, aside from 1 poster a while ago, no one is being very inflammatory, it is pretty civil. Do uninflammatory discussions really distress you that much? It's because there's not really a point to be made at all. Both side are pretty much in agreement over the facts (that Elo system is imperfect) and drawing different conclusions. - You believe that the Elo system places the outcome out the game significantly outside of the player's control and is in large determined by luck - Other people who don't whine about these things just play, get better, and their Elo magically improves as if there's some mystical correlation between skill and how much you win. From my perspective it's more like I believe the elo system is not accurate, and discussing the variables and the actual impact it has on varying players helps to further understand the implications of it. I think some other people would just rather not even think about it and pretend it is very accurate and then use it as some sorta measuring stick to win any discussion about balance or meta. I'd personally prefer the LoL community as a whole get past that sorta ignorance and analyze games and tournaments and performances based on their actual merits and not do the whole "i win this argument cause i am higher solo queue elo" routine. Teamliquid is a site where players who were very hardcore about playing or following esports flocked to, to have very intuitive discussions. I'd like it to maintain as much of that as possible.
The single most prevalent variable is your own personal skill + your current mental state, since it's the single variable that follows you around in every single one of your games. People can get stuck in a rough Elo range because of one aspect of their gameplay that's lacking, for sure. The thing is, the point is that if you are stronger by a certain extent relative to your current Elo, those outside-factors becomes less and less prominent relative to your own skill. Compound the fact that just because your Elo isn't immediately rising, doesn't stop you from improving your personal skills, and that's where you get people telling you not to think too hard about the Elo system
At least on TL I don't find many people who use their Elo as mean to sway their argument one way or another.
|
Seems like a prime case of diffusion of responsibility to me. I'm sorry, but in the end, statistically, if you are better than the people you're playing with then you will eventually make your way up. That's just the end of the story. Obviously everyone will have different experiences and some people will have it worse than others sometimes, but that doesn't change anything. Your tired argument that "not everyone will have the same positive experiences" can be returned to you on the same goddamned plate because the opposite is true as well, and all of your posts have relied almost entirely on statistically moot points or complete anecdotes. Then you engaged in a form of martyring by trying to proclaim yourself as some kind of marginalized minority, as a "persecuted innovator".
LOL
You can't be serious.
|
On March 20 2012 01:22 Juicyfruit wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 01:12 robertdinh wrote:On March 20 2012 01:07 Juicyfruit wrote:On March 20 2012 01:06 robertdinh wrote:On March 20 2012 01:04 ManyCookies wrote:
That is EXACTLY a snide remark. Even the "civil" discussion is marred with it. Yea I find it humorous how people always assume that just because someone is the minority in a certain belief they must be wrong, yet often it is the majority that make the snide remarks and try to poke fun at the minority. Innovators are a minority. Apparently believing in Elo hell is the minority now? In this particular context it obviously is. Since people are trying to argue that the system is pretty accurate. I don't think people DO believe it's particularly accurate, just that on a rough scale it's accurate ENOUGH. Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 00:56 robertdinh wrote:On March 20 2012 00:55 TheKefka wrote:On March 20 2012 00:53 robertdinh wrote:
I'm baffled, are you guys telling me that just because this is a very debatable issue, that you get frustrated seeing talk of it here? Why get that worked up over it, aside from 1 poster a while ago, no one is being very inflammatory, it is pretty civil. Do uninflammatory discussions really distress you that much? There is not constructive discussion when it comes to a topic like elo hell. I guess... what constitutes a constructive discussion though ya know? Like to me if I can get even 1 person to not deal in absolutes anymore and understand that not everyone has the same experiences in solo queue and some do get stuck at a lower elo than they should be, then i've made progress. On March 20 2012 00:56 Juicyfruit wrote:On March 20 2012 00:53 robertdinh wrote:
I'm baffled, are you guys telling me that just because this is a very debatable issue, that you get frustrated seeing talk of it here? Why get that worked up over it, aside from 1 poster a while ago, no one is being very inflammatory, it is pretty civil. Do uninflammatory discussions really distress you that much? It's because there's not really a point to be made at all. Both side are pretty much in agreement over the facts (that Elo system is imperfect) and drawing different conclusions. - You believe that the Elo system places the outcome out the game significantly outside of the player's control and is in large determined by luck - Other people who don't whine about these things just play, get better, and their Elo magically improves as if there's some mystical correlation between skill and how much you win. From my perspective it's more like I believe the elo system is not accurate, and discussing the variables and the actual impact it has on varying players helps to further understand the implications of it. I think some other people would just rather not even think about it and pretend it is very accurate and then use it as some sorta measuring stick to win any discussion about balance or meta. I'd personally prefer the LoL community as a whole get past that sorta ignorance and analyze games and tournaments and performances based on their actual merits and not do the whole "i win this argument cause i am higher solo queue elo" routine. Teamliquid is a site where players who were very hardcore about playing or following esports flocked to, to have very intuitive discussions. I'd like it to maintain as much of that as possible. The single most prevalent variable is your own personal skill + your current mental state, since it's the single variable that follows you around in every single one of your games. People can get stuck in a rough Elo range because of one aspect of their gameplay that's lacking, for sure. The thing is, the point is that if you are stronger by a certain extent relative to your current Elo, those outside-factors becomes less and less prominent relative to your own skill. Compound the fact that just because your Elo isn't immediately rising, doesn't stop you from improving your personal skills, and that's where you get people telling you not to think too hard about the Elo system At least on TL I don't find many people who use their Elo as mean to sway their argument one way or another.
I think a lot of people tell you not to think too hard about it because they also assume it is more accurate than it actually is. To a lot of people the fact that riot is even using it, is proof to them that it is accurate, when we all know just because some big game incorporates some major system, doesn't mean it is always good.
|
On March 20 2012 01:25 robertdinh wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 01:22 Juicyfruit wrote:On March 20 2012 01:12 robertdinh wrote:On March 20 2012 01:07 Juicyfruit wrote:On March 20 2012 01:06 robertdinh wrote:On March 20 2012 01:04 ManyCookies wrote:
That is EXACTLY a snide remark. Even the "civil" discussion is marred with it. Yea I find it humorous how people always assume that just because someone is the minority in a certain belief they must be wrong, yet often it is the majority that make the snide remarks and try to poke fun at the minority. Innovators are a minority. Apparently believing in Elo hell is the minority now? In this particular context it obviously is. Since people are trying to argue that the system is pretty accurate. I don't think people DO believe it's particularly accurate, just that on a rough scale it's accurate ENOUGH. On March 20 2012 00:56 robertdinh wrote:On March 20 2012 00:55 TheKefka wrote:On March 20 2012 00:53 robertdinh wrote:
I'm baffled, are you guys telling me that just because this is a very debatable issue, that you get frustrated seeing talk of it here? Why get that worked up over it, aside from 1 poster a while ago, no one is being very inflammatory, it is pretty civil. Do uninflammatory discussions really distress you that much? There is not constructive discussion when it comes to a topic like elo hell. I guess... what constitutes a constructive discussion though ya know? Like to me if I can get even 1 person to not deal in absolutes anymore and understand that not everyone has the same experiences in solo queue and some do get stuck at a lower elo than they should be, then i've made progress. On March 20 2012 00:56 Juicyfruit wrote:On March 20 2012 00:53 robertdinh wrote:
I'm baffled, are you guys telling me that just because this is a very debatable issue, that you get frustrated seeing talk of it here? Why get that worked up over it, aside from 1 poster a while ago, no one is being very inflammatory, it is pretty civil. Do uninflammatory discussions really distress you that much? It's because there's not really a point to be made at all. Both side are pretty much in agreement over the facts (that Elo system is imperfect) and drawing different conclusions. - You believe that the Elo system places the outcome out the game significantly outside of the player's control and is in large determined by luck - Other people who don't whine about these things just play, get better, and their Elo magically improves as if there's some mystical correlation between skill and how much you win. From my perspective it's more like I believe the elo system is not accurate, and discussing the variables and the actual impact it has on varying players helps to further understand the implications of it. I think some other people would just rather not even think about it and pretend it is very accurate and then use it as some sorta measuring stick to win any discussion about balance or meta. I'd personally prefer the LoL community as a whole get past that sorta ignorance and analyze games and tournaments and performances based on their actual merits and not do the whole "i win this argument cause i am higher solo queue elo" routine. Teamliquid is a site where players who were very hardcore about playing or following esports flocked to, to have very intuitive discussions. I'd like it to maintain as much of that as possible. The single most prevalent variable is your own personal skill + your current mental state, since it's the single variable that follows you around in every single one of your games. People can get stuck in a rough Elo range because of one aspect of their gameplay that's lacking, for sure. The thing is, the point is that if you are stronger by a certain extent relative to your current Elo, those outside-factors becomes less and less prominent relative to your own skill. Compound the fact that just because your Elo isn't immediately rising, doesn't stop you from improving your personal skills, and that's where you get people telling you not to think too hard about the Elo system At least on TL I don't find many people who use their Elo as mean to sway their argument one way or another. I think a lot of people tell you not to think too hard about it because they also assume it is more accurate than it actually is. To a lot of people the fact that riot is even using it, is proof to them that it is accurate, when we all know just because some big game incorporates some major system, doesn't mean it is always good.
Except nobody here notably said anything remotely close to what you are suggesting. You're just making up your own strawman arguments.
|
Ok it was funny at first, but some of you still arguing with him are just being dumb now. Do you not see how he just morphs his argument to continue argument? He's a troll, his post history is a troll, and he's been a troll in plenty of LoL threads, enough that I know a good amount of our posters here are familiar with him and his troll personality.
It's stupid now, please stop.
|
On March 20 2012 01:25 robertdinh wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 01:22 Juicyfruit wrote:On March 20 2012 01:12 robertdinh wrote:On March 20 2012 01:07 Juicyfruit wrote:On March 20 2012 01:06 robertdinh wrote:On March 20 2012 01:04 ManyCookies wrote:
That is EXACTLY a snide remark. Even the "civil" discussion is marred with it. Yea I find it humorous how people always assume that just because someone is the minority in a certain belief they must be wrong, yet often it is the majority that make the snide remarks and try to poke fun at the minority. Innovators are a minority. Apparently believing in Elo hell is the minority now? In this particular context it obviously is. Since people are trying to argue that the system is pretty accurate. I don't think people DO believe it's particularly accurate, just that on a rough scale it's accurate ENOUGH. On March 20 2012 00:56 robertdinh wrote:On March 20 2012 00:55 TheKefka wrote:On March 20 2012 00:53 robertdinh wrote:
I'm baffled, are you guys telling me that just because this is a very debatable issue, that you get frustrated seeing talk of it here? Why get that worked up over it, aside from 1 poster a while ago, no one is being very inflammatory, it is pretty civil. Do uninflammatory discussions really distress you that much? There is not constructive discussion when it comes to a topic like elo hell. I guess... what constitutes a constructive discussion though ya know? Like to me if I can get even 1 person to not deal in absolutes anymore and understand that not everyone has the same experiences in solo queue and some do get stuck at a lower elo than they should be, then i've made progress. On March 20 2012 00:56 Juicyfruit wrote:On March 20 2012 00:53 robertdinh wrote:
I'm baffled, are you guys telling me that just because this is a very debatable issue, that you get frustrated seeing talk of it here? Why get that worked up over it, aside from 1 poster a while ago, no one is being very inflammatory, it is pretty civil. Do uninflammatory discussions really distress you that much? It's because there's not really a point to be made at all. Both side are pretty much in agreement over the facts (that Elo system is imperfect) and drawing different conclusions. - You believe that the Elo system places the outcome out the game significantly outside of the player's control and is in large determined by luck - Other people who don't whine about these things just play, get better, and their Elo magically improves as if there's some mystical correlation between skill and how much you win. From my perspective it's more like I believe the elo system is not accurate, and discussing the variables and the actual impact it has on varying players helps to further understand the implications of it. I think some other people would just rather not even think about it and pretend it is very accurate and then use it as some sorta measuring stick to win any discussion about balance or meta. I'd personally prefer the LoL community as a whole get past that sorta ignorance and analyze games and tournaments and performances based on their actual merits and not do the whole "i win this argument cause i am higher solo queue elo" routine. Teamliquid is a site where players who were very hardcore about playing or following esports flocked to, to have very intuitive discussions. I'd like it to maintain as much of that as possible. The single most prevalent variable is your own personal skill + your current mental state, since it's the single variable that follows you around in every single one of your games. People can get stuck in a rough Elo range because of one aspect of their gameplay that's lacking, for sure. The thing is, the point is that if you are stronger by a certain extent relative to your current Elo, those outside-factors becomes less and less prominent relative to your own skill. Compound the fact that just because your Elo isn't immediately rising, doesn't stop you from improving your personal skills, and that's where you get people telling you not to think too hard about the Elo system At least on TL I don't find many people who use their Elo as mean to sway their argument one way or another. I think a lot of people tell you not to think too hard about it because they also assume it is more accurate than it actually is. To a lot of people the fact that riot is even using it, is proof to them that it is accurate, when we all know just because some big game incorporates some major system, doesn't mean it is always good.
Is there any point you're trying to make or are you just randoming your posts to see how long you can last before being perma banned ?
|
On March 20 2012 01:12 robertdinh wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 01:07 Juicyfruit wrote:On March 20 2012 01:06 robertdinh wrote:On March 20 2012 01:04 ManyCookies wrote:
That is EXACTLY a snide remark. Even the "civil" discussion is marred with it. Yea I find it humorous how people always assume that just because someone is the minority in a certain belief they must be wrong, yet often it is the majority that make the snide remarks and try to poke fun at the minority. Innovators are a minority. Apparently believing in Elo hell is the minority now? In this particular context it obviously is. Since people are trying to argue that the system is pretty accurate.
TL is made up mainly of players who want to get better. We technically are a minority here in comparison to the general population who plays LoL. Didn't we do a poll of TL's average ELO and it was like around 1500?
Most TLers, because of their starcraft background want to play to improve and NOT "play to gain elo." A lot of us have experience with playing on ladders and know the difference between complaining about "elo hell" "trolls" "cheese" "fucking terren," etc and just play to improve. Not even play to win. Play to improve. Which is a big difference. Elo has a general correlation to skill. A better player generally is a higher Elo than a worse player. We're talking general terms here because: You can not bring out a specific example to refute everything else.
Elo is essentially your average play level. You can play akali at 2k level 50% of the time and sivir at 1k level 50% of the time, and maybe you'll be 1.5k average. But the thing is, people have off days. Sometimes you get a troll. Sometimes your cat eats through your power cord and you lose that game since you disconnected. But those specific examples do not add to your argument or subtract from the argument that Elo hell doesn't exist.
It's really a waste of time to argue such things though, because in the end, if you really want to become a better player you practice. You don't worry about Elo. You worry about getting better. If you want to be a better player, you analyze your play and practice to improve upon it. I bet you if you actually do that correctly your Elo would rise. That's often what TLers like to advocate. It's why your argument is so useless here and why your time would better be used practicing than arguing silly semantics about something we don't believe exists.
Edit: So stop and get out or I feel Neo will help you with that. :> The door on your left please.
|
On March 20 2012 01:27 red_ wrote:
Ok it was funny at first, but some of you still arguing with him are just being dumb now. Do you not see how he just morphs his argument to continue argument? He's a troll, his post history is a troll, and he's been a troll in plenty of LoL threads, enough that I know a good amount of our posters here are familiar with him and his troll personality.
It's stupid now, please stop.
But I like hearing myself talk
>.>
|
On March 20 2012 01:27 mr_tolkien wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 01:25 robertdinh wrote:On March 20 2012 01:22 Juicyfruit wrote:On March 20 2012 01:12 robertdinh wrote:On March 20 2012 01:07 Juicyfruit wrote:On March 20 2012 01:06 robertdinh wrote:On March 20 2012 01:04 ManyCookies wrote:
That is EXACTLY a snide remark. Even the "civil" discussion is marred with it. Yea I find it humorous how people always assume that just because someone is the minority in a certain belief they must be wrong, yet often it is the majority that make the snide remarks and try to poke fun at the minority. Innovators are a minority. Apparently believing in Elo hell is the minority now? In this particular context it obviously is. Since people are trying to argue that the system is pretty accurate. I don't think people DO believe it's particularly accurate, just that on a rough scale it's accurate ENOUGH. On March 20 2012 00:56 robertdinh wrote:On March 20 2012 00:55 TheKefka wrote:On March 20 2012 00:53 robertdinh wrote:
I'm baffled, are you guys telling me that just because this is a very debatable issue, that you get frustrated seeing talk of it here? Why get that worked up over it, aside from 1 poster a while ago, no one is being very inflammatory, it is pretty civil. Do uninflammatory discussions really distress you that much? There is not constructive discussion when it comes to a topic like elo hell. I guess... what constitutes a constructive discussion though ya know? Like to me if I can get even 1 person to not deal in absolutes anymore and understand that not everyone has the same experiences in solo queue and some do get stuck at a lower elo than they should be, then i've made progress. On March 20 2012 00:56 Juicyfruit wrote:On March 20 2012 00:53 robertdinh wrote:
I'm baffled, are you guys telling me that just because this is a very debatable issue, that you get frustrated seeing talk of it here? Why get that worked up over it, aside from 1 poster a while ago, no one is being very inflammatory, it is pretty civil. Do uninflammatory discussions really distress you that much? It's because there's not really a point to be made at all. Both side are pretty much in agreement over the facts (that Elo system is imperfect) and drawing different conclusions. - You believe that the Elo system places the outcome out the game significantly outside of the player's control and is in large determined by luck - Other people who don't whine about these things just play, get better, and their Elo magically improves as if there's some mystical correlation between skill and how much you win. From my perspective it's more like I believe the elo system is not accurate, and discussing the variables and the actual impact it has on varying players helps to further understand the implications of it. I think some other people would just rather not even think about it and pretend it is very accurate and then use it as some sorta measuring stick to win any discussion about balance or meta. I'd personally prefer the LoL community as a whole get past that sorta ignorance and analyze games and tournaments and performances based on their actual merits and not do the whole "i win this argument cause i am higher solo queue elo" routine. Teamliquid is a site where players who were very hardcore about playing or following esports flocked to, to have very intuitive discussions. I'd like it to maintain as much of that as possible. The single most prevalent variable is your own personal skill + your current mental state, since it's the single variable that follows you around in every single one of your games. People can get stuck in a rough Elo range because of one aspect of their gameplay that's lacking, for sure. The thing is, the point is that if you are stronger by a certain extent relative to your current Elo, those outside-factors becomes less and less prominent relative to your own skill. Compound the fact that just because your Elo isn't immediately rising, doesn't stop you from improving your personal skills, and that's where you get people telling you not to think too hard about the Elo system At least on TL I don't find many people who use their Elo as mean to sway their argument one way or another. I think a lot of people tell you not to think too hard about it because they also assume it is more accurate than it actually is. To a lot of people the fact that riot is even using it, is proof to them that it is accurate, when we all know just because some big game incorporates some major system, doesn't mean it is always good. Is there any point you're trying to make or are you just randoming your posts to see how long you can last before being perma banned ?
If I get banned for having a perfectly civil discussion and making valid points with valid examples, then so be it. I personally don't think that will be the case, but I mean is that what you believe? People that don't agree with you are going to be permabanned if they don't end up agreeing with you?
|
United States37500 Posts
Fucking 10+ pages of elo hell bullshit. I am rather peeved.
Seriously guys? Each and everyone one of you have the capacity to ignore bs topics like "elo hell" in General Discussion and just avoid the issue like the plague. But instead, we have people who are trying to get the last word in and it perpetuates for pages on end.
Nice general warning for everyone: "elo hell" is not a topic to even be broached on TeamLiquid's LoL subforum. If you subscribe to the idea, good for you, keep it to yourself.
It's bad enough that we have to deal with GP10 discussions every other month...
|
On March 20 2012 01:30 NeoIllusions wrote:
Fucking 10+ pages of elo hell bullshit. I am rather peeved.
Seriously guys? Each and everyone one of you have the capacity to ignore bs topics like "elo hell" in General Discussion and just avoid the issue like the plague. But instead, we have people who are trying to get the last word in and it perpetuates for pages on end.
Nice general warning for everyone: "elo hell" is not a topic to even be broached on TeamLiquid's LoL subforum. If you subscribe to the idea, good for you, keep it to yourself. I personally thing the idea is simply a mental crutch but I digress.
It's bad enough that we have to deal with GP10 discussions every other month...
Fair enough
|
On March 20 2012 01:27 red_ wrote:
Ok it was funny at first, but some of you still arguing with him are just being dumb now. Do you not see how he just morphs his argument to continue argument? He's a troll, his post history is a troll, and he's been a troll in plenty of LoL threads, enough that I know a good amount of our posters here are familiar with him and his troll personality.
It's stupid now, please stop.
Well, now I know.
edit: I just noticed his sig. Explains a lot, really. It's comical.
|
On March 20 2012 01:32 koreasilver wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 01:27 red_ wrote:
Ok it was funny at first, but some of you still arguing with him are just being dumb now. Do you not see how he just morphs his argument to continue argument? He's a troll, his post history is a troll, and he's been a troll in plenty of LoL threads, enough that I know a good amount of our posters here are familiar with him and his troll personality.
It's stupid now, please stop. Well, now I know. edit: I just noticed his sig. Explains a lot, really. It's comical.
My sig has to do with natural skill, when people have almost a savant-like understanding of something and it is effortless to them. Sorta like Danny Carey with the drums, or roseanne barr with a sitcom script.
As far as calling people trolls just because they voice an unpopular opinion, I hope people can get past that at some point.
I remember a few months ago people were giving me a ton of crap for saying that mundo was actually really strong and calling me a troll. Now just because he got a few minor buffs and the pros pick him up people have accepted him back into the meta.
|
United States47024 Posts
On March 20 2012 01:19 ManyCookies wrote:+ Show Spoiler + Honestly, the people that whine about "elo hell" just seem like bad players Since people are trying to argue that the system is pretty accurate. Shit like this completely un-constructive. The first one is just an insult. The second is information we're all already aware of, with a completely pointless insinuation that they're wrong. Stop it.If you want to actually go somewhere with this, do some god damn binomial calculations, plug in some numbers (win rates, number of games, etc.), see the percentage of players who would be expected to win 50% games or less. It doesn't have to be a perfect model (Ice Cream) to see general trends or if the numbers are in the ballpark of significance. http://www.stat.tamu.edu/~west/applets/binomialdemo.htmlHere, I'll do a few: 55% win chance, 50 games. 19% of people 50% or below. 55% win chance, 100 games. 13% below. 55% win chance, 150 games. 9.3% below. 55% win chance, 200 games. 6.8% below. 55% win chance, roughly 260 games. 5% below or 2 SD. 60% win chance, roughly 55 games. 5% below or 2SD. 65% win chance (2:1 win ratio), roughly 20 games. 5% below or 2 SD. 60% win chance, 100 games. 2.7% below. 60% win chance, 150 games. .5% chance. I'm calling 5% of players stuck as a "significant" amount. As the win ratio increases (1:1, 1.22:1, 1.5:1, and ~2:1), the stuck rate goes down pretty damn fast. Is it likely you're get stuck? No, and most people claiming that are full of shit. Is there a significant amount of players who are expected to be stuck for a decently large amount of games? Yes. Any questions?
Your model is overestimating the "stuck rate" because it's not accounting for the fact that if your Elo drops, your win rate should go up because the difference in skill between your and your opponents rises.
As I said a couple pages ago, the system attempts to be self-correcting--as the disparity between your true Elo and and your current Elo gets large, your expected winrate similarly gets larger or smaller to correct you back toward the Elo where you have a 50% winrate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
