|
Noticed on Starcraft 2 Rankings (http://www.sc2ranks.com) that I'm currently in the Top 400 in the North American Diamond League. And quite frankly, I'm not that good. So I was curious: Where is everyone else?
Decided to cull some data. Scanned the Top 50 players in each league on the North American server using the above site. This data is current as of 9:00 P.M. EST on August 6, 2010 and I don't make any promise it's perfect:
Stats per league (from Bronze to Diamond, highest in bold, lowest underscored):
Average Rating : 761.9, 619.4, 588.5, 672.2, 798.6
Average Games: 69.8, 54.3, 58.6, 38.7, 165.8
Average Win Percentage: 61.13%, 63.41%, 63.61%, 73.19%, 65.80%
Players Above 80%: 0, 0, 0, 13, 2
Players Above 70%: 5, 5, 3, 37, 11
Players Above 60%: 28, 38, 48, 50, 43
Players Above 50%: 47, 50, 50, 50, 50
Other than the obvious bottleneck for Platinum League players trying to make their way into Diamond, there's really nothing I can figure out. Why is the Bronze League rated so high and why does it work down as it gets to Gold? Seriously, I'm confused. o.o
If anyone requests it, I'll upload the spreadsheet with my numbers.
|
The numbers just don't look right. Are you saying that the average rating for bronze players is 761.9?
|
Can you stop calling the number by your name a rating? It's just points that you get for playing and winning. It doesn't rate anyone, and it doesn't make much sense to compare people by it.
Anyway, this seems reasonable enough to me.
|
Well, one thing is that these stats won't be as accurate as they may at first seem, due to the fact that b.net promotes/demotes people between leagues in intervals. There was a recent quote form a Blizzard dev saying it's every 30 games, but I'm pretty sure it's less than that early on.
|
I'm top 800, which i was very surprised about..
to be honest it just doesn't seem right, im seriously quite shit -.-
|
On August 07 2010 12:33 richlol wrote:
The numbers just don't look right. Are you saying that the average rating for bronze players is 761.9?
That's what I ended up with. The numbers have shifted since I recorded the data. Nothing is abnormal, though.
http://www.sc2ranks.com/ranks/us/bronze/1
|
On August 07 2010 12:33 richlol wrote:
The numbers just don't look right. Are you saying that the average rating for bronze players is 761.9?
The player with he second most points worldwide is in Bronze with over 1000pts
looking for the stat site I saw it on..,
EDIT: It's right there ^^ lol ninja
|
Is anyone thinking that the high rating is the result of players who tanked their placement games and haven't gotten moved up yet?
On August 07 2010 12:35 catamorphist wrote:
Can you stop calling the number by your name a rating? It's just points that you get for playing and winning. It doesn't rate anyone, and it doesn't make much sense to compare people by it.
Anyway, this seems reasonable enough to me.
Believe me, I get your point, but it's ranking people based on that score. It's a rating to me. <3
On August 07 2010 12:35 baeracaed wrote:
Well, one thing is that these stats won't be as accurate as they may at first seem, due to the fact that b.net promotes/demotes people between leagues in intervals. There was a recent quote form a Blizzard dev saying it's every 30 games, but I'm pretty sure it's less than that early on.
The problem is that Blizzard should know very well from their modifications to The Frozen Throne ladder that people will give up on their ladder system if the results aren't definite. It's a very risky thing to say "Give it time, we promise it works!"
|
I don't think scanning the first 50 is really indicative of anything.
If the author of that site made the data available in a .csv format I would be able to apply some statistical analysis to the whole dataset.
We could look at the average across whole leagues, and the percentage of players above certain points, and look at correlation between rating and games played, whether there is statistically significant difference in points or win ratios across leagues etc.
But I think another major problem that may be screwing up the ladder at the moment is the promotion system, as has already been noted. For example, look at rank 1 platinum on the NA servers.
|
I personally had 900 points in platinum before i got moved up to diamond. This transitioned to only 300 diamond points. I was 38 in 13.
|
The rating/point system is not equal among the leagues. 800 points in bronze league is not the same as 800 points in diamond league. The system has some kind of conversion factor that it uses. When I got promoted from platinum to diamond, my points went from about 600 to about 300.
|
On August 07 2010 12:58 Chiburi wrote:
The rating/point system is not equal among the leagues. 800 points in bronze league is not the same as 800 points in diamond league. The system has some kind of conversion factor that it uses. When I got promoted from platinum to diamond, my points went from about 600 to about 300.
No one knows that for sure, because Blizzard refuses to say a single useful word on the ladder system.
It could have just dropped your points to be conservative and not overestimate your position in your new league. E.g if 600 points in platinum was the top 20% of players in platinum, 600 points in diamond may correspond to top 20% of players in diamond, but the system isn't sure you're at that level, so it puts you at 300 instead and sees where you go from there.
Again, if the whole dataset was made easily available it would be simple to see whether the distribution of points is equal across different leagues.
|
i speculate that the a lot of people in bronze might be just diamond players screwing up/messing around with their placements and got placed there. lol
|
On August 07 2010 12:30 MichaelJLowell wrote:
Average Win Percentage: 61.13%, 63.41%, 63.61%, 73.19%, 65.80%
Players Above 80%: 0, 0, 0, 13, 2
Players Above 70%: 5, 5, 3, 37, 11
I believe everyone should be ignoring all the numbers apart from these(rating is related to number of games played more than skill and is not comparable cross-league). This is indicative of a problem. I don't know what exactly it is or how to resolve it, but it does seem to be there.
|
I think this high lights an issue with how many sites are interpreting rating.
As can be seen by the averages they are at least comparable in the sense there is no dramatic rating difference as you go up the leagues.
Also as it has been stated a number of time now that when a player transitions from one league to another they loose a considerable portion of their points. This suggests that the ranking system does not consider someone rated 500 in diamond to be equivalent to some rated 500 in platinum.
|
On August 07 2010 13:14 brad drac wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2010 12:30 MichaelJLowell wrote:
Average Win Percentage: 61.13%, 63.41%, 63.61%, 73.19%, 65.80%
Players Above 80%: 0, 0, 0, 13, 2
Players Above 70%: 5, 5, 3, 37, 11 I believe everyone should be ignoring all the numbers apart from these(rating is related to number of games played more than skill and is not comparable cross-league). This is indicative of a problem. I don't know what exactly it is or how to resolve it, but it does seem to be there.
Platinum has a high winrate beacuse their average number of games played is so low. Your first few games are free wins if you are skilled enough to be diamond/plat and most platinum guys just havent played enough games against people of their own skill level. I don't see much of a problem based on the data you highlighted. There are only a few people in the lower leagues with high win rates that probably bombed placements and havent played enough to get moved to where they belong.
"rating is related to number of games played more than skill and is not comparable cross-league"
This part I agree completely with, but win% is also related to games played since your first few games being easy wins can skew your win rate without many games played.
|
On August 07 2010 12:30 MichaelJLowell wrote:
Noticed on Starcraft 2 Rankings (http://www.sc2ranks.com) that I'm currently in the Top 400 in the North American Diamond League. And quite frankly, I'm not that good. So I was curious: Where is everyone else?
Decided to cull some data. Scanned the Top 50 players in each league on the North American server using the above site. This data is current as of 9:00 P.M. EST on August 6, 2010 and I don't make any promise it's perfect:
Stats per league (from Bronze to Diamond, highest in bold, lowest underscored):
Average Rating : 761.9, 619.4, 588.5, 672.2, 798.6
Average Games: 69.8, 54.3, 58.6, 38.7, 165.8
Average Win Percentage: 61.13%, 63.41%, 63.61%, 73.19%, 65.80%
Players Above 80%: 0, 0, 0, 13, 2
Players Above 70%: 5, 5, 3, 37, 11
Players Above 60%: 28, 38, 48, 50, 43
Players Above 50%: 47, 50, 50, 50, 50
Other than the obvious bottleneck for Platinum League players trying to make their way into Diamond, there's really nothing I can figure out. Why is the Bronze League rated so high and why does it work down as it gets to Gold? Seriously, I'm confused. o.o
If anyone requests it, I'll upload the spreadsheet with my numbers.
Looks to me like your stats are based on the top 50 for each league. Considering that thousands are on each league I think that's the reason you're confused.
|
On August 07 2010 13:24 Chiburi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2010 13:14 brad drac wrote:On August 07 2010 12:30 MichaelJLowell wrote:
Average Win Percentage: 61.13%, 63.41%, 63.61%, 73.19%, 65.80%
Players Above 80%: 0, 0, 0, 13, 2
Players Above 70%: 5, 5, 3, 37, 11 I believe everyone should be ignoring all the numbers apart from these(rating is related to number of games played more than skill and is not comparable cross-league). This is indicative of a problem. I don't know what exactly it is or how to resolve it, but it does seem to be there. Platinum has a high winrate beacuse their average number of games played is so low. Your first few games are free wins if you are skilled enough to be diamond/plat and most platinum guys just havent played enough games against people of their own skill level. I don't see much of a problem based on the data you highlighted. There are only a few people in the lower leagues with high win rates that probably bombed placements and havent played enough to get moved to where they belong. "rating is related to number of games played more than skill and is not comparable cross-league" This part I agree completely with, but win% is also related to games played since your first few games being easy wins can skew your win rate without many games played.
Based on those numbers, the average top 50 player in platinum has roughly a 30-10 record. Don't you think someone with that record should be promoted. I'll admit that the numbers are skewed by the fact that platinum is as high as you can place, but 10 days after launch I'd imagine the numbers would have settled down a bit more than this. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I've heard of quite a few high level players complaining about not getting promoted even after craploads of wins.
|
On August 07 2010 13:14 brad drac wrote:Show nested quote +On August 07 2010 12:30 MichaelJLowell wrote:
Average Win Percentage: 61.13%, 63.41%, 63.61%, 73.19%, 65.80%
Players Above 80%: 0, 0, 0, 13, 2
Players Above 70%: 5, 5, 3, 37, 11 I believe everyone should be ignoring all the numbers apart from these(rating is related to number of games played more than skill and is not comparable cross-league). This is indicative of a problem. I don't know what exactly it is or how to resolve it, but it does seem to be there.
You sound like someone who has no understanding of the ladder system.
Rating is not related more to the number of games played than skill. This was not true in WC3 and there's no reason why it would be true in SC2. Look at, for example, how few games Dayvie has played compared to those below him.
Win ratio is a combination of 2 factors: the effectiveness of the AMM to find an equal skilled player and personal skill.
Until you can find a statistically rigorous way to separate the contribution from each of the two factors, so that we can examine only the part of win ratio that is due to the personal skill factor, win ratio is not a very useful metric for personal skill and difficult to interpret in terms of personal skill.
|
hahaha. Im one of the 60%+ players in bronze =P. acctually, i got cheesed 3 times in placements, plus, i was new at that time, not really sure wat to do.
sure feels food to finally beat a platinum player. sure feels bad to lose to a bronze player doesnt it?
WOOTS. im sorry, im happy.
Nice graph/data, BTW.
edit: aww so top 50, im not included >.>
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
