EPTI started a Smurf for fun purposes, and after my placements, I was immediately placed against Diamond players. I am now at 35-5 in Platinum, easily beating 2.6k+ players. Is my non-promotion a result of my MMR shooting up too fast and my moving average lagging behind?
SC2 Ladder Analysis: Part 2 - Page 20
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ch33psh33p
7650 Posts
I started a Smurf for fun purposes, and after my placements, I was immediately placed against Diamond players. I am now at 35-5 in Platinum, easily beating 2.6k+ players. Is my non-promotion a result of my MMR shooting up too fast and my moving average lagging behind? | ||
|
orotoss
United States298 Posts
It seems like your MMR isn't affected at all by bonus points but your ladder rating is. If you are always playing people of roughly equal mmr (regardless of their ladder points in relation to yours), isn't it better to maximize the amount of ladder points you could earn from the win? Wouldn't this make your wins more efficient in terms of how they reflect your ladder ranking? For example, player A and player B are of equal mmr. They are both rank 50th in diamond. Player A plays 10 games a day and always keeps his bonus pool empty, while player B only plays a game if he has at least 20 points. They both maintain an exactly 50% win ratio. Since they both have the same mmr, they will both be playing similarly ranked players, and will therefore be earning and losing similar amounts for wins/losses, but player B will get free bonus points added for wins. Won't player B end up with more points because his wins are making more points? Even though player A is winning more games total, he is also losing more games total. They both end up with the same mmr, but player B has more ladder points, and is ranked higher. I feel like I am missing something. | ||
|
CrayonKing
Cambodia124 Posts
I was wondering the same thing and his part 1 explained it to me, or at least I feel I understand... Excalibur correct me if im wrong. You have 2 ratings on your account, your ladder rating(displayed) and your matchmaking rating. If both of you have a 50% win rate, assuming you both started with the same match making rate, then in long run you will end up at the same point. This is because your display rating and matchmaking rating eventually coverage. So in your example, yes he is gaining more points so just say he's at 2000 points displayed but 1800 match making. You for i.e would be at 1600 displayed but 1800 match making as well. How they converge is that he will gain less if he wins because his 2000 displayed is much greater than his 1800 match making while you will gain a lot more when you win to get closer to your match making. Vice versa for losing as well - you will lose less then he does against the same opponent so that your displayed rating gets as close to your match making rating. Your matchmaking rating is not affected by bonus pool. So in theory, in the long run, you will eventually have the same amount of points assuming you use all your bonus pool . | ||
|
Lunatick
United States1 Post
I'm a 1000 Plat player in 1v1 with a win ratio of 59% percent. Last 15 matches have all been vs diamond and I won 12/15. Last match was against a 2000 diamond and was considered "even" Two matches before that one was against a 600 diamond and he was "slightly favored" After looking at the Platinum world wide rankings, I couldn't find a single one that was over a 59% win ratio. Will I get promoted as soon as I hit that magical 60% win mark? I guess we will see.... | ||
|
Ghad
Norway2551 Posts
![[image loading]](http://img814.imageshack.us/img814/9836/chartb.jpg) hopefully the ladder reset can shake things up. | ||
|
LambtrOn
United States671 Posts
On December 14 2010 09:40 Ghad wrote: I have given up on getting promoted from silver at this point. I am constantly beating top gold players and some plat players, but in silver i am stuck for eternity. My sc2sig.com chart looks like this: hopefully the ladder reset can shake things up. I'm having the exact same problem as you. I am exclusively facing mainly top gold and a few mid plat players and I'm in silver and I have a 60% win rate. It's getting kinda lame. It feels like my MMR is way lower than what it's supposed to be. | ||
|
neo_rtr
Sweden70 Posts
just poor play. But it was much faster to get domoted then promoted EDIT: To mention that the day i was promoted a new division must have been created as all the people on it where new promotions. May be there is a sortage of divisions and when one must wait for them before one is promoted | ||
|
DarKcS
Australia1237 Posts
| ||
|
JiYan
United States3668 Posts
| ||
|
Silmakuoppaanikinko
799 Posts
After a match finishes, the system needs to update the MMR and sigma for both players. Displayed rating will be discussed later in this post. Whenever a match finishes the winner’s MMR increases and the loser’s decreases. More interesting is what happens to the sigmas. If the match finished as expected with the MMR favored player winning (and remember, the loading screen “favored” display is NOT this) then both players' sigmas will decrease. I'm not sure I completely agree with this part, in a Bayes model what also needs to be taken into account is your mmr speed. Say we consider your current mmr/match, that is, the ammount of mmr you gain per match averagely. Say you just started out, you have an mmr of 1, but you're friggin pro so you win your first 50 matches non stop. So your mmr per match is constantly increasing. Even if you're matched to someone with a lower mmr and you beat that player, your sigma would still increase because your mmr speed again increased due to that match. The precise phrasing lies, I believe, in mmr-accelleration. If in a Bayes-based system, if your mmr accelates due to a match result, that is, it increases more than it increased last match, then your sigma should also increase, if your accelaration decreases however then it should shrink. In practice though, it comes down to that almost every time your mmr decellarates, it's because of a match that has an expected result. But take for instance this hypothetical situation: Say you have a 50 player pool, you have one player who is orders of magnitude above all others, each player faces each other player 1 time, while all the other palyers have around a 50/50 win/loss ratio at the end, this one player won all his 49 matches straight. At the end, this system will have given him a huge mmr, but also a huge sigma. There simply aren't any players near his level to compare him with for the system and give him a small sigma. So even though most likely after the first couple of matches he kept winning against players whom the system expected him tow in against, he would still increase his sigma. I believe the microsfot trueskill page also says something like this. Basically for the sigma to decrease after an expected result, both players mmr must be relatively similar. (microsoft says their absolute difference must lie within the sigma of the stronger player), while the mmai matches you continually against players who have somewhat of a similar mmr, in the hypothetical situation that there is one godlike player who is heaps and bounds above all other players, this can't happen. So even though he wins every single match, and is expected to win every single match by the system, with each win his mmr and sigma increases. Which makes sense from a mathematical perspective, as in such a situation there is no way to determine just how much better he is than everyone else, only that he is better. | ||
|
kcdc
United States2311 Posts
On December 28 2010 05:30 JiYan wrote: hey can someone answer this question for me? if you are exactly evenly matched with someone. same division modifier same mmr everything is the same lets say. if you win / lose how much points do you win / lose before bonus pool is factored in? Seems like it's 12 or 13. I think the 'Teams Even' range is 10-15 points. I believe slightly favored will reward an upset with 16-18, and favored with 19+. I suspect it works differently if the confidence in one or both players is low, however. | ||
|
ApocAlypsE007
Israel1007 Posts
| ||
|
whojohnisgalt
93 Posts
| ||
|
-AtRi-
123 Posts
| ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On January 25 2011 04:56 0AtRi0 wrote: how do we know when our moving average passes the threshhold, and we should be promoted? You don't. It's kept hidden. Furthermore a game is only counted toward promotion (wording could be clearer there) if it's against an active player by Blizzard's definition. You just have to keep playing and winning games. Unfortunately due to the nature of the random matchmaking system, you don't really know when you're going to get promoted because of the various factors involved in deciding that promotion which are hidden from the player's view. | ||
|
-AtRi-
123 Posts
| ||
a176
Canada6688 Posts
On November 13 2010 15:27 a176 wrote: I've read through the various threads here on TL but I'm thinking I've missed something as I don't quite understand how the MMR system is working for team leagues. I've been treading through 4v4 random for a while now, trying to get from platinum into diamond. I've been #1 for a little while now and am approaching 60% winrate, but I don't get how the system rates you and rewards you when you're playing in a game with all different kinds of MMR-rated players. Its a bit frustrating because I got into diamond in 1v1 and 3v3 (dont play 2v2) pretty quickly, but seem to be stuck in platinum for 4v4. Any insight is appreciated. Some data for you. After 4-5 months, I have finally been put into diamond 4v4 random at 302-274 wins. This after losing a good 5 or 6 games in a row. link to profile on sc2ranks if you want pretty graphs, http://sc2ranks.com/us/414315/aone | ||
|
SeakayKu
United States128 Posts
this is just a wild guess and i got some critisms... but the more i think about it, the more it makes sense to me... for 1, it explains a few promotions to masters with only 40-30 records their points per time is really high for 2, it explains a few players who did not get promoted even going 50-10 to masters their points per time is really low i do not think bnet looks into each game's statistics very closely, but to record and relate to a single game by it's points per time is very simple let's say for excal's explanation diamond mmr 2600 sigma 100 vs platinmum mmr 2200 sigma 200 and there is an upset mmr 2200 guy wins so new stats be diamond mmr 2400 sigma 150 and platinmum mmr 2400 sigma 180 and now since the platinmum guy reached the assumed diamond threshold mmr 2300 then there would be a check on the statistics of the game, this game in particular, that got the platinum's player's mmr above the threshold you can see a player's game history statistics, and i think it may be a good indication, more/less on how well the player has been playing compare the rate of economic spending, technology spending, and army spending, average APM, etc. so to excal, if you haven't find solutions to your question, here is my thoughts use it or discard it as you wish | ||
|
Kenny
United States678 Posts
http://www.sc2ranks.com/us/2091925/NeckSlam Edit - Does this mean I should lose games, based on earlier discussion in this thread? | ||
|
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On February 09 2011 01:00 SeakayKu wrote: since game came out i've been thinking that the only explanation to promotion early/late might be the actual game points you got per time when game is finished this is just a wild guess and i got some critisms... but the more i think about it, the more it makes sense to me... for 1, it explains a few promotions to masters with only 40-30 records their points per time is really high for 2, it explains a few players who did not get promoted even going 50-10 to masters their points per time is really low i do not think bnet looks into each game's statistics very closely, but to record and relate to a single game by it's points per time is very simple let's say for excal's explanation diamond mmr 2600 sigma 100 vs platinmum mmr 2200 sigma 200 and there is an upset mmr 2200 guy wins so new stats be diamond mmr 2400 sigma 150 and platinmum mmr 2400 sigma 180 and now since the platinmum guy reached the assumed diamond threshold mmr 2300 then there would be a check on the statistics of the game, this game in particular, that got the platinum's player's mmr above the threshold you can see a player's game history statistics, and i think it may be a good indication, more/less on how well the player has been playing compare the rate of economic spending, technology spending, and army spending, average APM, etc. so to excal, if you haven't find solutions to your question, here is my thoughts use it or discard it as you wish Nope, any in-game data is completely discarded because it's potentially exploitable. A truly unbiased system (which is the best kind of system) only cares about wins and losses and the quality of the players participating. You can find this confirmed on the official Battle.net forums, in the Multiplayer and E-Sports forum, in a sticky posted at the top called the Leagues and Ladders FAQ. | ||
| ||
