Letsg0Met586, on 23 March 2015 - 08:51 PM, said:

I'm not following your argument I'm afraid. So long as teams are thrown together randomly (ie, you're just as likely to wind up with good players as bad player), then adding worse players to the mix will boost your win rate for the reasons explained above. Nothing you've said contradicts my argument.

Maybe I'll use actual numbers this time around, because I actually could barely understand what I was saying back there, too. *facedesk*

Let's make some fundamental, *theoretical* assumptions, using statistics.

**1) A noob has a 30% chance of victory***

**2) A noob has a 50% chance of appearing on either team**

**3) YOU, the pro, have a 75% chance of victory***

** Both of these are if they are alone with a group of completely average, 50% WR-level players*

MATH TIME - Remember, this is all from your point of view, as a pro with a 75% WR (dear lord that is high)

**Noob as a teammate: (0.3 + 0.75) / 2 = 52.5% chance of victory**

**Noob as an opponent: ([1 - 0.3] + 0.75) / 2 = 72.5% chance of victory**

50-50 shot for each scenario; average those two and you get **62.5%** chance of a victory as long as that noob stays in your games.

You just lowered your win ratio by quite a bit.

Unrealistic? Sure, let's go again.

**1) A noob has a 40% chance of victory (that's reasonable)**

**2) A noob, again, has a 50-50 shot of appearing on either team**

**3) A pro has a 60% chance of victory (again, fairly reasonable)**

MATH TIME

**Noob as a teammate: (0.4 + 0.6) / 2 = 50% chance of victory**

**Noob as an opponent: ([1 - 0.4] + 0.6) / 2 = 60% chance of victory.**

That's an average **55%** chance of victory with that noob in existence. You just lowered your WR again.

In fact, we would see this trend go on and on until both the noob and the pro approach a WR of 50%, in which case the averages would balance out to nothing.

I tried to make this as straightforward as possible, so hopefully this cleared something up.