Messages In This Thread

amoffett11 · 03-21-2013, 10:55 AM

(03-21-2013 10:24 AM)GreatGonzales Wrote:
(03-21-2013 09:45 AM)amoffett Wrote: Your assumption that the percentage of 1v1 ST's should be equal to the number of 2v2 ST's is only correct if you assume that the distribution of skill in the two formats is equal. Due to a number of factors that make 2v2 a very different game than 1v1, this is not the case.

The reason there's 40 STs at 2v2 is because with the exception of numbers 1 and 2, the rest of you at the top are so close to each other that is impossible to find a threshold (right now) where you will get the percentage that you're looking for.

I assume nothing here; I make that clear in the OP. My contention we can use 1v1 as a model for 2v2 is only because that league has been successful and it feels like the right level of exclusivity. I recognize the differences between the two.

I don't understand why you believe it's "impossible" to find the right threshold for ST promotion. Why should it be impossible? Difficult, sure, but OML at least knows that the first threshold was too high, this one may be too low, so the proper threshold is probably somewhere between the two, right? Also, your statement that the top 40 2v2 teams are very close together in skill level is largely erroneous.

Here's our problem: you're not reading what I'm saying.

What I said: it's impossible (right now) to find a threshold where the percentage of 1v1 STs is the same as the percentage of 2v2 STs.

What you apparently read: it's impossible to find the right threshold.

What I'm saying is that the distribution of skill is such that by lowering the threshold a little, like they did, they lowered it below at least 30 teams, this is because these 30 teams skill rating is very close together. There is no in between, at this point in time.

I recognize that you believe, based on nothing but the games you've played against various teams, that you and about 15 other teams stand above the rest. However, with the evidence we have given the two league distributions (and this, along with the top 200 2v2 lists is the only evidence we have) supports the theory that you're all closer together than you think. Just because someone is #3 and someone else is #69 doesn't mean that their skill ratings are not actually close together.

And you do make an assumption: you assume that two skill distributions in two different formats should be equal. There is nothing to suggest that this would be the case. It's apples and oranges.