The Top LOSERS in CC

[Fruitcake]

I posted in the other thread that an increase in win rate in 1v1 is more difficult to achieve than an increase in win rate in multiplayer. After reading this thread, I thought I should explain in more detail....

No don't, please don't...

[Robinette]

Updated -

The Top LOSERS in CC... as of April 27, 2008

Here are the players on Page 1 that have a 33% or LOWER win ratio...
These players can't even win ONE out of THREE games...
Now THAT is a LOT of LOSING...

There and now 36 --> MORE PAGE 1 LOSERS THAN EVER BEFORE

13 Naato 3357 679 222 (33%)
17 Scott-Land 3277 2518 837 (33%)
24 ZawBanjito 3132 587 179 (30%)
39 skillerman 2964 295 80 (27%)
46 JBoy 2842 572 151 (26%)
60 deguu 2755 1975 609 (31%)
64 Point Guard 2743 284 79 (28%)
70 pzaviski2003 2716 939 253 (27%)
72 steve monkey 2703 1278 365 (29%)
76 KIDPAT 2679 373 107 (29%)
79 Itrade 2671 820 259 (32%)
89 joecoolfrog 2646 249 78 (31%)
91 NUKE 2643 1038 323 (31%)
96 alexad99 2625 251 74 (29%)
99 BeakerWMA 2623 700 216 (31%)
120 Jade Empire 2575 1017 318 (31%)
129 RL_Orange 2548 3076 870 (28%)
134 Robinette 2535 386 122 (32%)
136 Beadle 2532 173 55 (32%)
155 steve066 2492 716 169 (24%)
158 yljester 2482 395 122 (31%)
160 Serpentor 2481 302 87 (29%)
165 DigitalRuin 2472 347 115 (33%)
169 maniacmath17 2460 1082 345 (32%)
172 CubColtPacer 2453 39 13 (33%)
174 Tennisie 2451 181 46 (25%)
180 Hesoos 2444 309 88 (28%)
184 igotaished 2438 1033 343 (33%)
196 austex 2422 622 204 (33%)
201 Blanor 2411 229 64 (28%)
222 6 King Man 2374 321 105 (33%)
228 ballenus 2364 368 104 (28%)
229 dkiller83 2363 322 76 (24%)
231 cyberdaniel 2359 736 200 (27%)
235 nesterdude 2352 2408 712 (30%)
245 fbonsignori 2332 275 65 (24%)

LOSERS... EVERY ONE OF THEM!!!!
and whadda ya know... i just won a game which puts me smack dab in the middle... #18 out of 36

[Kemmler]

stop bumping Robinette... you sarcasm has expired!

[jiminski]

Bump!

[realmss]

Jeeze, those guys really need to start playing stacked triples games.

[Robinette]

The Top LOSERS in CC... as of July 6, 2008

We now have 37 players on Page 1 that have a 33% or LOWER win ratio...
These players can't even win ONE out of THREE games...
Now THAT is a LOT of LOSING...

7 skillerman 3990 457 145 (32%) General General 4.5 United States
13 maniacmath17 3517 1334 433 (32%) General General 4.6 United States
14 krull16 3489 983 290 (30%) Brigadier Brigadier 5.0 Portugal Portugal
19 joecoolfrog 3197 395 111 (28%) Brigadier Brigadier 4.9 United Kingdom
28 steve066 3073 931 217 (23%) Brigadier Brigadier 5.0 United States United States
34 waynemgough 3002 1312 374 (29%) Brigadier Brigadier 4.5 United Kingdom
44 ZawBanjito 2940 600 180 (30%) Colonel Colonel 4.8 Japan Japan
57 csh1979 2853 2163 694 (32%) Colonel Colonel 4.9 United States
78 Soldier4Christ 2779 640 175 (27%) Colonel Colonel 4.6 United States
80 RedSoxFan 2774 346 97 (28%) Colonel Colonel 5.0 United States
82 ballenus 2766 519 155 (30%) Colonel Colonel 4.7 Belgium
88 Asclepio 2726 272 85 (31%) Colonel Colonel 4.9 Canada Canada
97 steve monkey 2697 1538 433 (28%) Colonel Colonel 5.0 United Kingdom
132 coffees 2597 2086 557 (27%) Colonel Colonel 4.8 United States
136 Choco 2590 956 317 (33%) Colonel Colonel 4.7 Sweden Sweden
142 Beadle 2574 180 57 (32%) Colonel Colonel 5.0 Russian Federation
143 Serpentor 2573 369 103 (28%) Colonel Colonel 4.9 United States United States
147 Hesoos 2567 547 137 (25%) Colonel Colonel 4.9 Spain Spain
149 Blanor 2566 239 67 (28%) Colonel Colonel n/a United States United States
150 Thomas.Paine 2561 1647 458 (28%) Colonel Colonel 4.8 United States
153 Silver- 2556 349 110 (32%) Colonel Colonel 4.7 Canada Canada
158 igotaished 2553 1076 360 (33%) Colonel Colonel 4.9 Israel Israel
162 OOGA BOOGA 2539 2035 576 (28%) Colonel Colonel 5.0 United States
175 the liquidator 2520 142 47 (33%) Colonel Colonel 5.0 United States
176 4red 2512 1368 399 (29%) Colonel Colonel 4.8 Australia Australia
178 JBoy 2511 683 171 (25%) Colonel Colonel 5.0 United States
186 Mc Lor 2499 2812 746 (27%) Major Major 4.8 Belgium Belgium
193 Jade Empire 2487 1106 347 (31%) Major Major 4.7 Canada Canada
200 BeakerWMA 2481 787 239 (30%) Major Major 5.0 Canada Canada
211 austex 2457 655 216 (33%) Major Major 5.0 Japan Japan
214 markhoule 2454 287 79 (28%) Major Major 5.0 United States United States
216 Stbtgal 2452 161 52 (32%) Major Major 5.0 United States United States
219 Robinette 2450 404 124 (31%) Major Major 5.0 United States United States
226 6 King Man 2436 375 115 (31%) Major Major 5.0 United States United States
228 Point Guard 2435 349 102 (29%) Major Major n/a United States United States
238 100023690 2418 1357 338 (25%) Major Major 4.9 Spain Spain
246 Battle On 2413 220 60 (27%) Major Major 5.0 United States United

[FabledIntegral]

Personally, I feel teh lower the win% you have typically shows the better player you are, when compared to people of similar rank. I feel if you take a General with a 80% win vs a General with a 30% win, the General with 30% will have a better idea in general on what to do given a random scenario.

[Scott-Land]

Personally, I feel teh lower the win% you have typically shows the better player you are, when compared to people of similar rank. I feel if you take a General with a 80% win vs a General with a 30% win, the General with 30% will have a better idea in general on what to do given a random scenario.

I'm not sure if I totally agree here. You can only deduct that the 80% win rate General plays mostly team games whereas the 30% is most likely a singles player (will be isolated scenarios where this doesn't apply). I don't see how you could generalize their particular skill level is higher or lower than the other. What about win percentages are you basing your opinion on ? Team players are not as good as singles players ?

[qeee1]

lower win rate and same points => more opponents per game + higher ranked opponents per game

[gloryordeath]

I play a lot of Term games and I don't think this means much....

[herndawg]

I play almost all public Term 6-8 player and have a 39 percent. Was forty till this month. I am getting killed all the more nowadays. And alot of the guys listed are much better than me in other game types also.
Percent in 8 player is way different that percent in 2 player or doubles.
I think it would be cool if you could see percentages on all game types per person on a search or something.

[hulmey]

I play almost all public Term 6-8 player and have a 39 percent. Was forty till this month. I am getting killed all the more nowadays. And alot of the guys listed are much better than me in other game types also.
Percent in 8 player is way different that percent in 2 player or doubles.
I think it would be cool if you could see percentages on all game types per person on a search or something.

Winston Churchill had a great saying for statistics but i forgot it now

[Timminz]

I think it would be cool if you could see percentages on all game types per person on a search or something.

You could find that out using the map rank plugin.

[owenshooter]

Personally, I feel teh lower the win% you have typically shows the better player you are, when compared to people of similar rank. I feel if you take a General with a 80% win vs a General with a 30% win, the General with 30% will have a better idea in general on what to do given a random scenario.

whew... thanks for the great laugh!!!-0

p.s.-and yet another bump of a thread... this one over 2 months old and dead... wow... robinette is making this a habit... no comment.

[herndawg]

I think it would be cool if you could see percentages on all game types per person on a search or something.

You could find that out using the map rank plugin.

I will have to check that out. cool
thanks

[FabledIntegral]

Personally, I feel teh lower the win% you have typically shows the better player you are, when compared to people of similar rank. I feel if you take a General with a 80% win vs a General with a 30% win, the General with 30% will have a better idea in general on what to do given a random scenario.

I'm not sure if I totally agree here. You can only deduct that the 80% win rate General plays mostly team games whereas the 30% is most likely a singles player (will be isolated scenarios where this doesn't apply). I don't see how you could generalize their particular skill level is higher or lower than the other. What about win percentages are you basing your opinion on ? Team players are not as good as singles players ?

I'm basing it off something different. From what I'm aware a majority of the players with 80% win rate don't have it because they are doing some triples thing (or whatever you're referring to). I was under the impression most 80% win rate players have the General status (and 80% win) because they play only new recruits, etc. Less skilled opposition overall. While the 30% win are able to hold their ground vs multiple opponents and don't rely on winning 1v1's vs shitty people.

It was meant to be a generalization though simply because not everyone falls into that category. Many exceptions, but that's what I concluded myself at least.

[Scott-Land]

ohh you mean with the map ranks and such ? -- yeah I agree

[Robinette]

p.s.-and yet another bump of a thread... this one over 2 months old and dead... wow... robinette is making this a habit... no comment.

silly boy... it's not a



it's an

[Silver-]

I am in this list and I always play "six-player singles" or "eight-player singles" games.

Half of my game are private games played played with 2000+ players.
The other half is public games open to any players.

I am happy with my stat:
- 153 Silver- 2556 349 110 (32%) Colonel Colonel 4.7 Canada Canada

This is really close to 33% and I made it to the top player list (first page) in CC.

[yeti_c]

I play almost all public Term 6-8 player and have a 39 percent. Was forty till this month. I am getting killed all the more nowadays. And alot of the guys listed are much better than me in other game types also.
Percent in 8 player is way different that percent in 2 player or doubles.
I think it would be cool if you could see percentages on all game types per person on a search or something.

Winston Churchill had a great saying for statistics but i forgot it now

Just to point out - that was Benjamin Disraeli.

C.

[Shark2112]

I posted in the other thread that an increase in win rate in 1v1 is more difficult to achieve than an increase in win rate in multiplayer. After reading this thread, I thought I should explain in more detail....

....

Makes perfect sense, right?

gdeangel- do you work at NASA or something?

[hulmey]

I play almost all public Term 6-8 player and have a 39 percent. Was forty till this month. I am getting killed all the more nowadays. And alot of the guys listed are much better than me in other game types also.
Percent in 8 player is way different that percent in 2 player or doubles.
I think it would be cool if you could see percentages on all game types per person on a search or something.

Winston Churchill had a great saying for statistics but i forgot it now

Just to point out - that was Benjamin Disraeli.

C.

Im sure me old mate Winston made it famous though

Ps.Fabled you are so misguided and quite biased in your statement. Your saying whoever has a high win percentage ration is a bad player or cheating lol. i would say the opposite. I know a few single player's who amaze it and how they manage to win time and time again on sequential settings. Please view clive for more info......

Futhermore, what about team games?!?!

[FabledIntegral]

I play almost all public Term 6-8 player and have a 39 percent. Was forty till this month. I am getting killed all the more nowadays. And alot of the guys listed are much better than me in other game types also.
Percent in 8 player is way different that percent in 2 player or doubles.
I think it would be cool if you could see percentages on all game types per person on a search or something.

Winston Churchill had a great saying for statistics but i forgot it now

Just to point out - that was Benjamin Disraeli.

C.

Im sure me old mate Winston made it famous though

Ps.Fabled you are so misguided and quite biased in your statement. Your saying whoever has a high win percentage ration is a bad player or cheating lol. i would say the opposite. I know a few single player's who amaze it and how they manage to win time and time again on sequential settings. Please view clive for more info......

Futhermore, what about team games?!?!

1. Hardly misguided - I said it was a generalization. And I can show you numerous results of high rankers where it's accurate.
2. I looked at Clive's games and about 50% of them are 1v1's vs Cooks or new recruits. You simply proved my point. Even if it's only 40%, the point still remains. They are all cooks/new recruits/low ranks.

[gannable]

dam,

if you extended that to the first 2 pages I'd make the list.
A week ago I was heading towards the first page, I even got my winning % to 34.

But then I lost 6 games in a row.

[BENJIKAT IS DEAD]

1. Hardly misguided - I said it was a generalization. And I can show you numerous results of high rankers where it's accurate.
2. I looked at Clive's games and about 50% of them are 1v1's vs Cooks or new recruits. You simply proved my point. Even if it's only 40%, the point still remains. They are all cooks/new recruits/low ranks.

Generalisations are dangerous and annoy me immensely, as everyone gets tarnished with the same brush.

I guess I am well known for being fairly good at sequential Waterloo foggy 1v1s, but it is assumed that I am beating up new recruits most of the time to get my 87% win rate.

I have always know this to be unfair, so I thought I'd actually count them up... (the following assumes that since the games have finished as many players have gone up as have gone down - not sure how good that assumption is but I have to go with it)

I have finished 446 sequential foggy 1v1 Waterloo games; only 66 (15%) have been against players with scores of below 1100 (and with a single exception, all have joined public games second, so I haven't targeted them specifically); on the other hand 116 (26%) have been against players who currently have a score of 2000 or more (a fair few of these are tournament games or ones where I've joined second - I hunt the high ranks not the low ones - I want a challenge not just free points!), the remaining 264 games are against players who currently have scores between 1100 and 2000, many of whom have 70%+ win rates on Waterloo themselves.

Because I don't want to hide it, and someone will find them anyway, I do have a "darker" side too (although I've grown out of it now): I tried my hand at freestyle 1v1 joining second al la MOBA, JR, torcav... and my results show how hard it is to gain points from these games - I won 189 from 207(91%) and yet only have a net score of +88 from those games, one extra loss to a cook and it would be zero.

So I have got my rank from the Waterloo games mainly... and not from new recruits per se.

Rereading your points above, I've just realised that they are very ambiguous and I may just be agreeing with you... whatever...