Ladder percentage just... stupid
Posts: 50
The ladder contains the % win which leaves you with a weird number like .785. I'm sorry to say that most people will find this interpretation of the win/lose ratio unintuitive and confusing.
Why not make it simple and understanablae so most everyone understands the win/lose ratio? Like 20 wins and 10 loses = a ratio of 2:1. Or maybe just write % like you would normally do "win ratio: 93,3%. Way easier to decode imo.
Anyway I am not surprised as the game and this forum somehow refuses to build and improve on previously tried and testet solutions that clearly work.
Posts: 252
Posts: 53
I would now like to point out how stupid this entire topic is.
Posts: 3709 | Subs: 2
Posts: 1006
Posts: 75
Posts: 150
What do you show in your suggestion for someone with 0 loss?
ahaha
end of thread
mathematics will always win
Posts: 50
Posts: 177
Posts: 1582 | Subs: 4
Posts: 934
Posts: 120
Posts: 2838 | Subs: 3
The ladder contains the % win which leaves you with a weird number like .785. I'm sorry to say that most people will find this interpretation of the win/lose ratio unintuitive and confusing.
The ratio displayed as .### comes from the tradition of expressing hitting statistics in baseball in the same way.
Posts: 16697 | Subs: 12
W/L is also expressed that way (see PCT):
http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/standings/index.jsp?tcid=mm_mlb_standings
Posts: 2838 | Subs: 3
Posts: 16697 | Subs: 12
Posts: 1164
since the win percentage is simply the ratio multiplied by 100, a person with 0 losses (and more than 0 wins) would have a ratio of 1.000 and a win percentage of 100% (@Seb/GuruSkippy).
imho, nobody here is stupid (neither the ladder, nor OP), except for maybe the guys that call other guys stupid.
Posts: 177
Posts: 1582 | Subs: 4
since the win percentage is simply the ratio multiplied by 100, a person with 0 losses (and more than 0 wins) would have a ratio of 1.000 and a win percentage of 100% (@Seb/GuruSkippy).
Its not simply the win/loss ratio multiplied by 100. That would again lead to infinity in case of zero losses.
Percentage is wins/(wins+losses) = wins/(total number of games). This one is superior to win/loss ratio due to the reason mentioned by Seb. It cannot grow to infinity but is limited between 0 and 1.00
Posts: 1164
Its not simply the win/loss ratio multiplied by 100. That would again lead to infinity in case of zero losses.
Percentage is wins/(wins+losses) = wins/(total number of games). This one is superior to win/loss ratio due to the reason mentioned by Seb. It cannot grow to infinity but is limited between 0 and 1.00
isn't that exactly what i said? i don't think i ever specifically mentioned w/l ratio... ;-)
Livestreams
13 | |||||
11 | |||||
735 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.1109614.644+10
- 4.607220.734+1
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.722440.621+4
- 9.261137.656+2
- 10.1041674.607-2
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
capiqua
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, jhonnycena0400
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM