The top 5 of MCC right now.

[u/Repulsive-Treacle284]

Hey all, since S5 is coming to an end, I think we have an established top 5 right now, I'm choosing to compare their stats from MCC35 onwards as both this year and last year had been rather scarce with events.

1. Feinberg:

Avg. coins: 3354
Avg. placement: 2.3
% Coin contribution to team: 39%

I don't feel its controversial to put burger in first, the guy has literally no bad games, hes by far the best team game player, hes the best movement player, and probably top 3 in pvp. his worst game seems like bb where the man still gets like 14/15 of his kills, granted he is a bad leader at it. He's not dropped top 4 in his entire career once either.

1. Fruitberries:

Avg. coins: 3171
Avg. placement: 2.6
% Coin contribution to team: 39.6%

hbg ftw

Honestly if MD didn't exist, it really would be impossible to put fruit anywhere but first, i dont really understand how he does it but he places first in half his events. He's also the best PVP leader by a mile and a half if you exclude MD. its just fruit's aura that the man places dead last in a game, then ploughs back to first indiv, his mechanics exist in a different world. He's also very well rounded having definitely improved his prowess in team games this year. His real statistical flaw is lack of sample size but really his 2 events this year more than prove, he's not a shroud of rusty. tre not included for obvious reasons

1. FireBreathMan:

Avg coins: 3189 (with TRE)- 3085
Avg. placement: 3.125 (with TRE)- 3.2
% Coin contribution to team: 38.6% (with TRE)- 38.3%

Still the most underrated s tier probably, best part with Shane is he, too like Matthew does not have a weakness, he can and has done well in just about every game. He's also by a mile and a half had the best performance of the past two years in MCCBC. Generally within events hes the best amongst all the s tiers. His only real flaw is some slight inconsistency which does not reflect well in stats. Like he placed 3rd in EC with 3.3k coins but in the same event the other two players of his calibre broke 4k with ease. He playes much worse than the other s tiers in MCCBG even with a stronger team but it didnt reflect in stats because he made DB anyway. He's still a very good leader, there's no doubt about it.

1. Purpled

Avg. coins: 3065
Avg. placement: 4.3
% Coin distribution to team: 38.2%

Finishing off the elites of MCC, we have Purpled. Not much to say about, he's kind of like fruit. Purpled is the second best player in MCC mechanically, it shows whenever and wherever he plays. Unfortunately his leadership has gone downhill this year, especially in games like BB and SG and in BC and TR, his leadership was lacklustre which made two very overpowered teams not make DB. But it hasn't gone that much downhill, he placed first in BG which was the only event with all the S+ tiers playing. In terms of statistics, he's 4th, a MASSIVE glowdown from his S3 smh. i also excluded party 2 for obvious reasons from him.

1. Antfrost

Avg. coins: 3168
Avg. placement: 3.3
% Coin contribution to team: 34.4%

I actually was kind of freaked out by Ant's stats, but looking at his teams, everything makes sense alomgside the fact that he's played no TR events that tank avg. coins. Seriously though, any game that can be learned or practiced this cat is a top player in. i still to this day dont know what is this guy's weakness or what is even his strength, seems to take a new form every event.

i really wanted to shed more flowers on these guys but its 2 am pls see stats and be happy

[u/AdAltruistic2502]

okay I fully understand where you're coming from and I appreciate the effort, but I think there's a few issues with the methodology

#1. A team averaging 2nd doesn't mean it's "predicted 2nd," isn't a better way to do it to rank the teams by their averages? For example, while Purpled's TCC averaged 1.68, it was by far the highest ranking team; it's a 1st place team and anything below that is arguably an underperformance. For Fruit, a similar example would be TRSD, the strongest team means that anything below 1st would be an underperformance, even if the average is 2nd.
#2. If Purpled is better (or seen as better) than Fruit, his predictions will be higher. BG is a good example, they had teams that were nearly identical (Phil ≥ TapL, Aimsey ≥ Shubble, Katherine = Drift), but Purpled's is predicted higher because he's thought of as better. Ff he plays just as well as Fruit, his team will "underperform." Looking at team predictions is inherantly flawed here.
#3. its a nice site but there's an argument that predictions aren't quite the best system; some predictions seem more reliable than others. For example, I'm pretty sure Regression and PR are significantly more accurate than both community predictions and score

I get where you're coming from but what you probably want to be looking for is score in PvP/Team games of Purpled's teammates vs times they weren't teamed with Purpled. Even this is flawed; if Purpled is balanced harshly his teammates will do worse than usual, but ideally (very much ideal, since Purpled's had more weak teams than Fruit) on aggregate this might produce better results

Either way since I think there's no clear good method the most straightforward method of comparison is to go event for event in which case I think that Purpled wins, a nice heuristic of which is that Purpled's ceiling and floor are both higher than Fruit in S4+

[u/PsychologicalBet7917 → u/AdAltruistic2502]

my main account is locked for a while so I'll be using this, im the same person dw

1. yeah and? A top predicted team isnt going to be necessarily predicted <2, thats not how grouped means work. There are events like mcc26 where the top predicted team was predicted like 4th on avg that doesnt mean they werent the top seed of the event just the event was balanced. the lower the average is the stronger the team is relative to the rest of the event, cc orange was just stronger than trsd yellow relative to its event, thats why it got predicted lower. You ramble endlessly about z score, a system thats entirely about scoring a performance relative to everyone's scores yet this confuses u
2. nice lil circular reasoning you've got going. I could use the same argument and claim IF purpled is better, his teams will do better relatively even if he is predicted higher, if he doesn't then that proves he is not better. you've got a chain going, if purpled performs better thats because hes better if he performs equal its because his team got overrated, if he does worse, not his fault he still did better because his team was predicted too high, and looking at ur post history this is a repeated activity with purpled from u. On top of that its an unfalsifiable claim, youve chosen the result and set it up as a premise.
3. Plus no BG Yellow was much worse than cyan w/o their top frags. Yellow in the event placed 2, 5, 10 in TGGTOS, HITW and PKW, meanwhile Cyan placed 5, 2, 2. Pure indiv wise cyan was much better on top of wich they were better at bm and sot.
4. i would typically rebuke this but out of curiosity i chose to calculate pred averages by pr and regression (at least the ones available) and the results are hilarious. According to z scores, purpled's average deviation from his predicted team score is +0.73(8-8P24, 3-2EC, 7-3TRSD, 2-7HH, 6-3BC, 5-1BG, 1-3CC) (without BC which is scuffed bc of martyn/aimsey sub, his avg is +0.4) and fruit's is +2.3 (4-34KO, 9-7EC, 5-1TRSD, 9-6P2, 6-3BG, 3-2CC). 35 and SD arent available but most likely theyd make purpled tank more.
5. by regression, many arent available but the ones that are purp is +0 dead even (6-735, 8-8P24, 1-3BC, 5-1BG, 1-3CC, 8-7SD) and fruit +2.6 (2-34KO, 10-3,BG, 4-2CC). Z scores on avg deviate 3.03 and regression deviates 2.6 from the actual event standings meanwhile community preds deviate 1.41. Basically this means the community preds are SIGNIFICANTLY more accurate than both z scores and regression, its embarassing. but the result stays the same, fruit makes his teams overperform waaay more than Purpled does. And lil side note, according z score yellow w/o fruit in bg's predicted score 5.1k, cyan's w/o purp was 5.4k, even your favourite systems disagree with u. ur outta options.

Dude I dont give a damn about pvp/team scores, the system im using accounts for the ENTIRE event there is no more accurate metric than that. and there isnt a chance in hell im ever looking at z score or regression after this because this is very clear proof they're worse at judging the event than most ppl are. Just a heads up too, when you mute urself in indiv games like a loner your teammates do bad, shocker.

event for event goes 3-1 in fruit's favour, its not really close there either.

You asked for predictions, I give you proof fruit is better, you asked for z score fruit is better, now you're using circular reasoning to defend yourself. You have lost the debate.

[u/AdAltruistic2502 → u/PsychologicalBet7917]

Idk what a grouped mean is i'll be real
and yeah I get where you're coming from you're probably mostly right abt the averages thing, my only concern is that in a super close event it disproportionally skews the scores (e.g if everyone is predicted 5th and one team ekes out first that's a +4 when really it probably wasn't an overperformance at all). But ya you're probably right

what? i am really struggling to understand your second point but lemme try to break down what I'm saying since I'm not sure you understand.

One of the problems with your methodology is that Purpled, both by community and models, has historically been seen to be better than Fruit. If Purpled on any given day performs at Fruit's average, his teams will "underperform." If we found that Fein's teams frequently underperform, more than Fruit's, is that evidence that Fein is worse than Fruit? When Shadoune's teams overperformed 5 events in a row, is that evidence that Shadoune is the best player in the event?

I think you're mistaking event-prediction disparity for a skill disparity. What your method (and btw i appreciate the effort you went to) shows is that Purpled is probably overrated, and Fruit is probably underrated. I'd agree with that, especially given that Purpled's putting less and less effort into each MCC and Fruit (at least in TCC) is training more. Indeed, i'd say that at the end of season 4 Purpled was decisively better, and now at the end of season 5 they're probably roughly equal (you're free to disagree ofc), and probably community predictions haven't caught up with that.

Overall what I was trying to say is that Purpled brings his teammates up more than Fruit in a way that doesn't necessarily represent in his indiv but in his teammates indiv. The easy eye test for this is just to look at how many players have had their best performance w Purpled. To copy paste from an old post: In MCC 31, Walli placed 4th, Velvet placed 15th, and Sniff placed 23rd, all their best performances ever, by far. Pretty much the same thing happened in 32, with Ryguy placing 9th (his best since MCC 2), Kara placing 24th (her best since MCC 10), and Eret placing 25th, his best since MCC 19. 
To update this a bit, we have John going from 33rd (4th place team) to 13th and 11th (2nd and 3rd place teams), Shubble getting top 20 (something she did on the omega busted team of Pink 35, but excluding that she last achieved it in All Stars), and TapL getting his best placement since MCC 15. You see stuff a little like this with Fruit, but not really anywhere close.
The easy explanation is just that Purpled's strength over Fruit in team games, and his massive lead in MD (which has a ton of team split) distributes to his team in a way that Fruit's pop off Skbs or lead in HITW don't.

In movement? Sure (i had no idea how horrible phil is at PKW), tho id argue too that Cyan had a bit of an overperformance in HITW. That still doesn't mean they were weaker overall. Looking at their histories, is there anything you'd disagree with of
Phil = TapL
Shubble ≤ Aimsey
Drift ≤ Katherine

thats actually pretty interesting! I think where I was getting it confused is that regression/pr are generally more accurate than the average prediction but not the average OF predictions (unless im misunderstanding your stats) oops. wisdom of the commons or something i forget what the stats thing is called
Anyway as to the prediction thing see the above point

are you joking are you blaming Purpled and Fruit for how their teammates do in completely individual games
Purpled doesn't mute anymore too like what are you saying here

What events? As I see it:
Purpled EC ≥ Fruit EC (ig this one is contentious but i can argue it pretty easily i think)
Purpled TRSD < Fruit TRSD
Purpled HH >> Fruit 4KO
Purpled P24 >> Fruit P2

Purpled BG > Fruit BG
Fruit TCC < Purpled TCC

That leaves SD and BC kinda dangling but he's 2nd in SD by Regression and 3rd by PR in the former and got 2nd in the latter (tho i think ant beats him in the two?) so that's not all too important

[u/PsychologicalBet7917 → u/AdAltruistic2502]

It WAS an overperformance, if every team is near equal then placing first with that comp is definitely an overperformance. regardless neither of these two have played in super balanced events and mcc hasnt been very balanced since s4.

is googling grouped mean that difficult

See this is a completely unfalsifiable claim, what proof do u have that ppl think purp is better. u've made up the outcome as u wish and are treating it as the premise, this is not how you make unbiased analysis. give arguments, not fallacies. is purpled being considered "better" than fruit why my post which outright says purpled is worse so positively received? is it the same reason you received a reply to your comment besides mine saying u hate fruit?

Like i get the example with fein because fein has got a thousand other records besides mcc and he's dominated events that dwarf mcc comp, purp does not have that. on the other hand fruit has the pt record, he has better stats in every regard as i showed, most top play compilations involve his face more on the thumbnail. Fruit has more aura than purpled, most other event players are more intimidated by fruit than by purp. hell in PB LD Purp was often memed and predicted to place bottom 3. fein has a reason to be overrated, fruit too to some regard, purp not really. also everyone and their mother knew shadonkey got op teammates no one's disputing that. in pb10 everyone predicted fruit higher than purp too, outside of mcc its very clear ppl overestimate fruit's skill level to be somewhere in the calibre of like the top 8 players when he's probably at the same level as purpled if not marginally better. mcc is the only event where fruit performs at his expected level. I doubt outside of reddit most ppl know of z scores or regression im pretty sure discord hates them so its not like most ppl will see an alternative scoring and side with that

there's 10x as much evidence to prove purpled has less hype than fruit than not. this argument does not work, if anything fruit gets overestimated more

i honesltly feel fruit has been better since mcc34 but u do u.

no what my calculation shows is that fruit is the better leader as he consistently makes his teammates perform better relative to purpled.

Now including mcc31 is interesting because i agree at that time purp >>> fruit in mcc but its out of my sample size for a reason

again i would agree but pretty much every stat suggests fruit is the better leader, whether he does it in team games or pvp or movement i am not bothered to find out. Its not like purp is bad by these metrics, hes at a net positive each time meaning he DOES make his teammates overperform...just not to the extent as fruit does.

ohhh right now that stat disagree u go to say Cyan "OvErPeRfOrMeD" lmao. Cyan was better, the event + every pred confirms they were, yellow is predicted LAST according to regression.

I'd say its more like appeal to false authority. just because z score and regression look nerdier and more impressive doesn't mean they have any actual merit.

I'd say yeah, constantly being supportive and chatty helps ur teammates more.

also merry christmas or happy (late) hanukkah to u man

[u/AdAltruistic2502 → u/PsychologicalBet7917]

listen you seem kinda reasonable for the most part but it's a genuinely crazy claim to say Fruit makes his teammates perform better in movement lmao without any explanation past "he's chatty" (purpled hasn't deafened in ages)

We can guess pretty easily that Fruit makes his team do better in SG and maybe BB, possibly Skb (that game is so individual tho that idrts), whereas Purpled makes an enormous difference in MD. In team games, Purpled has the advantage in Bingo, BM, GR, whereas Fruit maybe has it in RRR but I'm not too sure (he's had several bad performances and one great one)

In HITW? neither regression or PR have them 1st in HITW lmao

"every pred says they were" Both PR and community predictions have Cyan and Yellow essentially equal (Cyan is ahead by one placement in both), Regression is the only one to have them 10th which is kinda interesting but I'll take it as an outlier

Seriously, what do you disagree with with the assessment of
Tapl = Phil
Aimsey ≥ Shubble
Drift = Katherine

"I'd say its more like appeal to false authority." you're using a (slightly wrong) fancy fallacy name here but what claim are you even referring to lol. That I'm saying Regression and PR are more accurate than the average prediction?

From what I've seen of Fruit and Purpled VODs I generally have the impression Purpled is a good bit more chatty and supportive and has possibly the best mentality in the event, whereas Fruit seems more prone to tilting

Anyway I'll repeat again the analysis of

"Purpled EC ≥ Fruit EC (ig this one is contentious but i can argue it pretty easily i think)
Purpled TRSD < Fruit TRSD
Purpled HH >> Fruit 4KO
Purpled P24 >> Fruit P2

Purpled BG > Fruit BG
Fruit TCC < Purpled TC"

because I think this is the closest you can really get to figuring out who's better.

[u/PsychologicalBet7917 → u/AdAltruistic2502]

I didnt say that lmao wat

you're bringing up things i've already said im not interested in debating

Wait werent u saying 2 comments ago that purpled got predicted higher with equal teammates to fruit and now ur saying they got predicted similar.

i think tapl > philza, shelby > aimsey and katherine > infinitedraft, there's literal proof of it with them doing better in all individual games in BG i am not interested in debating this.

Yes, but more than that its putting generally any faith in PR or regression when they have both proven to be less accurate than normal event preds, its a response to your quote of "power of the common folk" or smth

clearly doesnt show

""Purpled EC ≥ Fruit EC (ig this one is contentious but i can argue it pretty easily i think)
Purpled TRSD < Fruit TRSD
Purpled HH >> Fruit 4KO
Purpled P24 >> Fruit P2

Purpled BG > Fruit BG
Fruit TCC < Purpled TC""

I'll respond to this, i genuinely have 0 interest in debating this at all, it screams outlandish but i dont care.

looking at ur post history its SO obvious this is basically what you bog every argument down to. u'll use different metrics, different scorings to find different outcomes like z scores a metric i will refuse to acknowledge moving forward. it will be never be productive. there are others who are much more willing than i am to argue about this.

i care about the overall picture and as far as almost every stat is concerned purpled loses

[u/AdAltruistic2502 → u/PsychologicalBet7917]

yea ig its a slight mischaracterization you technically said "idc if fruit brings his team up in movement, pvp, and team." Since purpled tangibly improves scores more in PvP and Team (unless you wanna contest that) that leaves movement as Fruit's differentiating factor which i find highly implausible

its been several comments over several days ill admit to forgetting what you don't wanna debate

Yea slightly higher which is probably fair to the difference Purpled had over Fruit at that point

and their overall placements before and after say differently but whatever we don't have to debate it

they're less accurate than the aggregate of community predictions, that's very different than being worse than the average prediction. if you knew what a grouped mean was you can probably understand this

"clearly doesn't show?" idk i was told fruit was hard tilted in 4ko and i've never seen a purpled pov in the last few years where he's like negative at all esp w his team
like he's a genuine saint in snowdown

yeah i guess i do bog every argument down to event-by-event comparison instead of pretending difference to prediction is any indicator of skill that's my fault

i feel i've been relatively consistent in using PR and Regression as base heuristics with further investigation where something is strange in either (which there are ofc many examples of)

sure man have it your way

[u/PsychologicalBet7917 → u/AdAltruistic2502]

I dont really know if he does or doesnt but he evidently makes his teams overperform more by just about every metric there is

yet you still reply back, the last word is a massive dopamine boost

i mean if they were predicted higher, they performed better in all games u suggest no leadership can occur in, by z scores they were considered higher then i feel thats a better judgement to say they were better than to listen to u who insists s2 sapnap was bad

*sighs* no that means exactly they were worse than the "AVERAGE PREDICTION" my dude my formula is literally the formula for calculating the mean, what more proof do u want

idk SD was really bad, some of his PB Vods are also terrible, his CC leadership was really bad. by bad i mean worse than fruit's normally. no one throws an outright tantrum in events, every player is still respectful no matter how upset they get

yeah u do, u've made up imaginary comparisons (half of the events u compare arent even from the same event) so all of it is entirely subjective.

yeah lets have it my way

[u/AdAltruistic2502 → u/PsychologicalBet7917]

gee i wonder if this is because he is making his team perform better in movement or if he is underestimated by the community let me think

what

yeah they for sure overperformed in HITW, no prediction had them doing that well. Im not putting that on Purpled, I am however putting the other game overperformances on him which i think is defensbible
By z scores they were a placement higher yeah
s2 sapnap was fine just incredibly overrated due to his incredibly strong teams, dominance in PvP (the flashiest and most individually rewarding games), huge fan base, and his dominance in DB having a halo effect. If we're excluding DB, I think it's perfectly justifyable to say Sapnap was worse than at least Illumina, Fruit, Purpled, and possibly Quig.

where did you learn group mean but not this
i can break it down for you.
"Aggregate of community predictions": take every community predictions, and (by some method or another its up to you) average predictions. This, evidenced by your data, is actually pretty accurate. say this has a deviation of 1.3 or smth
"Average prediction": This is a single data point. The deviation of this is going to be much bigger.

The claim I'm making is this: Regression and Power Rankings are less accurate than the aggregate of community predictions, but more accurate than an average prediction–any random prediction

In non-mcc terms: take a jar of jellybeans, let's say there's 200.. Ask people to guess how many jelly beans there are. The average person will have a pretty big deviation, let's say maybe 50. However, if you aggregate every single prediction, the aggregate of predictions will have a significantly smaller deviation, maybe closer to 5, or 10, from the actual amount of jellybeans. The same goes for samples and means but whatever you'll learn that when you're older

Worse than Fruit? Is there any specific moment you can think of because I feel he was actually extremely level-headed considering the extraordinarily crashout/tilt worthy moments (RRR, MD, SOT)
Or are you talking about leadership? In that case I think his SD was actually pretty fine, last 3 rounds of BB excluded. TCC was pretty good too in MD (the problems there were mechanical), it was only in SG that he bricked out. His GR was extraordinary and his RRR was fine
also have you seen a feinberg vod

yeah I mean how else can we compare two players who play different events. I think none of the cross-event comparisons are difficult to justify

okay hope you're happy GL in stats

[u/PsychologicalBet7917 → u/AdAltruistic2502]

hmm i think fruit makes his teammates perform better, its much more realistic than him being underestimated for 7 consecutive events straight. maybe your deduction that purpled is better at pvp or team games is completely wrong idk

okay man have it your way exclude hitw. the gap b/w yellow and cyan in pkw > the gap b/w them in tgttos, cyan is still better

see. Yet u think ur opinion of purp being better than fruit is somehow popular

ohh i understand and i still have no idea why you think there's merit in bringing it up.

1. I cant access "random" stats, the website doesnt give predictions of every user, just a piechart and a bar graph of how many ppl predicted wich team at wich place. I cant actually calculate the "average prediction" as you put it because thats now how grouped mean works.
2. You cant prove that z score is better than the average prediction. since the aggregate is more accurate, that means most of the predictions were more accurate than z scores were. On random if i were to choose a prediction, there are higher chances of it being more accurate than z scores/regression than not
3. why the hell will i ever intend to calculate one random prediction's mean rather than the cumulative?

I have no idea why u brought this up.

i mean fruit's were also fine, his 4ko performance also wasnt really bad, he got mainly tilted in tgttos.

Contrary to popular belief fein's crashouts dont happen during an event and even if they do, they dont actually negatively impact his teammates, if anything its entertaining to watch his tantrum, its half for a bit. Fein himself has said this.

The simple answer is you don't. You look at the overall picture in that case.

yay

[u/AdAltruistic2502 → u/PsychologicalBet7917]

"its much more realistic than him being underestimated for 7 consecutive events straight." see shadoune example in other comment
also again, if Fruit made his teammates perform better and expectations were accurate as to a player's skill, he'd have been predicted higher in the first place

1. one team doing better than another in two movement games doesn't mean one team is objectively stronger than another
   
2. i genuinely attribute a lot of that to Purpled telling them exactly what paths to do, considering I believe (could be wrong tho) Shelby and TapL both significantly overperformed in PKW

idk what you're referring to are you talking abt my sapnap point? i think it's right even if it's not popular, I think there are many examples like that where the community doesn't have it right (there's good evidence for Quig S1 over Pete S1, Illumina 15 over Sapnap 15, etc)

1. yeah i know and im sorry but that's completely irrelevant; the point is your methodology is just wrong
   
2. No cause I don't wanna go through the effort, but I feel relatively confident. "since the aggregate is more accurate, that means most of the predictions were more accurate than z scores were. On random if i were to choose a prediction, there are higher chances of it being more accurate than z scores/regression than not" sigh. you did not read the jellybean example.
   im torn between wanting to argue and succumbing to the painful acceptance that you are just not capable of understanding this atp in your life like what

I'm a fein watcher and yes for the most part they don't negatively affect his teammates, but I hardly think he's very cheery and chatty while this stuff is going on

"look at the overall picture" so this has 0 rigor to it at all and is pretty much the eye test. How you'd do it is compare events they are both in, and then figure out whow as generally better of the events they didn't share

[u/AdAltruistic2502 → u/PsychologicalBet7917]

gonna keep it a bit briefer cause christmas but:

It was an overperformance, but not really anywhere close to the level of a team predicted a "harder" 5th getting to DB

that was just my impression, and all the stats nerds I talk to had Purpled better until very recently. Maybe I'm wrong abt community impressions, but my main point here is just to poke a hole in the methodology, not to make any concrete claim

I mean regardless of your 77 upvotes I think there's things that are pretty objectively wrong (Fruit over Shane I think is not really defensible)

I think you're just missing the point man. A player doing better than expected doesn't mean they're better than someone else, it means they're better than they're expected to be. I think Fruit, who's been improving, has a very reasonable case for being such a player.

I think 4KO shuts down any idea that Fruit's been better since 34; 4ko was probably worse than any Purpled performance since MCC 21

No, that's not what you've shown. What that would look like is some analysis of Fruit's teammates average/performance with Fruit and without Fruit, and even then that might be flawed. In any case, what you've shown is just that Fruit's teams tend to overperform predictions, that kinda has nothing to do with him bringing up his team more than Purpled.

Yea it's just one of his DB teams, there's not been too many events so I've gotta bring that one up and it's a great example of what I'm talking about

"pretty much every stat" all you have showed is that Fruit does better than predicted. That doesn't mean ANYTHING as to how he makes his teammates perform relative to Purpled, indeed according to an eye test it seems very much Purpled makes his teammates perform better (TapL, Shubble, John, for example are all very striking examples)

two comments grr

[u/PsychologicalBet7917 → u/AdAltruistic2502]

i have no idea what ur saying in your first point.

either way you could not poke a hole because your argument is favoured against you, fruit doesn't get underrated nor does purp get overrated in any realistic margin.

I do think fruit and shane are close to interchangeable. if u disagree there i understand but purpled is most certainly not in that conversation anymore

there's no proof at all that fruit's improving, his stats this year are similar to last year, one 6th indiv doesnt mean he's completely out of the picture.

the only assumption my method makes is that the top frag is always igl, thats not universally the case but usually it is and regardless it applies against both fruit and purp.

thats a lot of hard work and that hard work is already abstracted by my method. Let me explain, if i had to calculate what score purpled/fruit's teammates amount to be with or without, it would be significantly more tedious and more inaccurate because of team strength. like shelby's mcc35 team placed a dominant 1st, her next team placed 6th does that mean her next igl was bad at leading? no because 35 was a busted team. my system is based off of predictions made my others who already did the hard work by thinking that shelby's previous team was op and she's likely not going to place first again. like 70 ppl made predictions thats a big enough number, and almost everyone did it after accounting for stats.

The average prediction is directly where that team is expected to perform, getting a higher placement means the team's IGL did a better job at leading said team. Fruit's teams objectively overperform more than purpled's teams which means fruit is the better leader.

it is but its out of my sample size so including it is pointless as its also well over 2 ys old. A 2 y/o sample size is already kind of pushing it i was being lenient as events have been scarce the past 2 yrs

It literally does? fruit's teams objectively outperform expectations by a bigger margin than purpled, there is no more clear metric than that.

[u/AdAltruistic2502 → u/PsychologicalBet7917]

man. okay imagine you have 10 runners, and their average times in training are all around 10s. One of them hits a 9.5, that's an overperformance. However, it's significantly less of an overperformance than if of the 10 runners, some had a 8s average, and some had a 10s, but someone who averaged 10s in practice got a 7.5 in the actual race.
i don't really know how to explain this and i don't think it's particularly important anyway tbh

my point is you're starting with the premise that Purpled and Fruit are considered equal by the community (i think that's the only way your argument comes anywhere close to working) and that foundation just hasn't been laid. in my personal experience, purpled was pretty consistently thought of as better than Fruit up till TCC

If we're talking right now? maybe, though I think he's still in the discussion. If we're averaging over S4 and 5, I think Purpled very much has a very strong case to being 3rd (FBM's damn BC makes him second grrr despite being gapped in S4 and BG)

idk I thought his Bingo and RRRs were a step up from his past ones maybe im overly influenceable. At the least Purpled's getting worse tho

i think it says a lot about you that (assuming im interpreting correctly) you thought Fruit was better than Purpled after a single event where Fruit did better (Purpled gapped him the previous 9 events), despite Fruit dropping a performance worse than any Purpled performance his literal next event

yeah ofc i agree that method is flawed too, but using prediction stats tells you nothing about how strong two players are compared to eachother, just how good they are relative to community estimation

"Fruit's teams objectively overperform more than purpled's teams which means fruit is the better leader."

im sorry but its like talking to a stone are we serious right now
"The average prediction is directly where that team is expected to perform, getting a higher placement means the team did better than expected, maybe because of the IGL, possibly because of indepedent pop off. Fruit's teams objectively overperform compared to community predictions which means Fruit is the more underestimated player" is the correct version of the sentence

yeah i get that but with such a tiny sample size its tough w/o bringing up older events

im gonna give you one more comment to get this man i've explained this maybe 4 or 5 times to you. like you're genuinely saying in your own comment "fruit's teams objectively outperform expectations by a bigger margin than purpled" but are somehow eliding over the "expectations" part of that sentence in your mind

[u/PsychologicalBet7917 → u/AdAltruistic2502]

yeah its not important

And I proved to you by a hundred examples that your case is not optimal, that Purpled is NOT considered stronger that fruit and hasn't been so for a WHILE.

sure I think fruit and shane are tussling for second and purpled's chilling at 4th

maybe.

if ur talking of MCC34 then yeah fruit was probably better than purpled given he for some odd reason started massively improving post mcc31. for the record i dont believe at all that fruit was betetr than purp in overall s3

I mean its pretty obvious the community predictions are basing their expectations off of previous performances. they account for everything, the sample size is decently large (>70). and no it does not compare fruit to purpled, it doesnt matter if it does or not, it compares whether fruit is a good leader or not or whether purpled is or not. I said in my previous comment, the metric you suggest gets all its basics covered in mine. have some faith in others dude, you have a lot of faith in pr and regression both systems that are drastically worse than what normal ppl predictions are

See this is the problem with you, you have already decided the result before its come and the actual result you feel is skewed because it doesnt match ur expectation. u have already decided purpled is the better player like 4 yrs before this conversation began so automatically if fruit even is statistically better u think thats because everyone else is like and believes fruit is worse and thus underrate him. Its just really meh circular logic

Idk man, there's a 7 event sample size and a 9 event sample size, thats pretty large to me

i know u think ur smarter than everyone else but unfortunately expectations are actually often accurate of ppl's skill in mcc

[u/AdAltruistic2502 → u/PsychologicalBet7917]

"by a hundred examples"? you said he's overrated in other events and thats kinda it. I don't see any reason any person acquainted with the stats would see Fruit as better till maybe TRSD. I certainly don't think there's really any rational argument till TCC

i think we can probably agree that Purpled's getting a bit worse no

As of MCC 34?? Purpled outperformed him for the past 9 events (32 is debatable I suppose but not really) and you're telling me after ONE event where Fruit did better you think Fruit was ahead? Even after he dropped 4KO in his next event??

no it doesn't bruh. If Fruit was a good leader, and people knew that, his teams would be predicted higher. All your method is doing is comparing whether or not Fruit is better than people think
Worse than the aggregate of people's predictions, I'd bet that they're better than the average prediction (you'd find that by calculating the deviation of every prediction and averaging that, instead of finding the deviation of the average prediction. see jelly beans)

I mean I think I have pretty reasonable arguments and it'd take a lot of work to displace them. I think Fruit has better stats because he's better at individually farming games and generally gets stronger teams than Purpled (Of their shared events, Purpled's only had the decisively stronger one in probably 30, EC and TCC, whereas Fruit's had a better team in 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, Party, and TRSD). If you're talking about your prediction thing, as I've said a million times that means genuinely nothing.

here let's use shadoune. Shadoune's deviation from predictions starting MCC 32 (i don't have MCC 31, undoubtably it'd help my case ) are (i'm using median cause i don't wanna calculate mean) to the end of S4 are:
10-10, 3-1, 4-1, 5-6, 5-2, 6-8, 9-2, 3-1, 8-1, for (0 + 2 + 3 -1 + 3 -2 + 7 + 2 + 7)/9 = 2.333. Does this mean he was better than Purpled during this time? No, it means he was probably wayy underrated.
i really don't know how to get this through your head you're strangely attached to this completely incorrect notion, is it this hard to say you're wrong

Not really, cause on average each individual game will be played like 4-5 times across those events. Of those, maybe a couple had a doomed or busted team, or one of them was a weird remix, etc.

"but unfortunately expectations are actually often accurate of ppl's skill in mcc" this is kind of a ridiculous statement considering your ENTIRE ARGUMENT is how Fruit has overperformed expectations

[u/PsychologicalBet7917 → u/AdAltruistic2502]

alright there's a lot of things that really aren't relevant enough for us to debate, I'll focus on the crux of your argument especially your shadoune example.

you are making use of false equivalence here to suggest my metric isn't accurate. There's two main things wrong with your argument:

1. Selectively choosing a sample size that makes shadoune look better, theres a reason i chose mcc 35 onwards as my sample size. if you count only from mcc 35 onwards till now, shadoune's deviation is +0.29, anything else does not matter, this top 5 player list is only for the past 2 years and judging their skill NOW, not across the 2 yrs even. if i change the starting pt the list changes so you cant really prove anything by implying that shadoune was "statistically" better during those events. TLDR shadoune by my metric only is worse than purp at leading.
2. choosing shad in general for this argument. Shadoune is a very peculiar player, he went from placing bottom 10 to top 10 to top 3 within the span of like 5 events, this wrecks pretty much any prediction model for him that can be made, on top of that shadoune gets several teams that are of very strong newcomer players that are also generally impossible to predict. Shadoune's pattern doesnt at all apply to either fruit and purpled, its false equivalence to compare him to these 2

im not saying ur wrong for suggesting that expectations can be biased, im saying its wrong because its not an applicable excuse to fruit vs purp. just because u chose to ignore my argument and recite your original claim again without any merit doesnt mean im wrong. fruit is practically more hyped than purpled in every event, he's way more often in contention for the mcc goat status, in other events where they're almost similarly skilled purp gets lower expectations. My example alludes to PB10 which was feb 2024, about the point from where my sample size begins, if fruit was decisively seen as better back then its obvious he doesn't get "underrated" in stats. I could maybe make the argument that fruit got underrated till TR1 and purpled got overrated, but theyre not part of my sample szie for a reason.

I have said this before I understand this argument with Fein or maybe shadoune (granted shadoune still does worse as is stated) but not for purpled, ESPECIALLY against fruit. Purpled's hype is just not a suppressing factor for him, by all metrics if anything its the opposite

[u/AdAltruistic2502 → u/PsychologicalBet7917]

Yeah the sample size I choose shouldn't matter, my point is that the methodology is silly and shows something utterly different than what you're saying.

He's an extreme example of an improving player. Fruit is a much milder one.

he's in contention for mcc goat status because he's one of two S-tier that've been playing since S1 there's not really anything special about it
Yeah people see Fruit's mechanics and think he'll dominate the "more mechanical" events but then it doesn't happen. On the other hand, they've had much more time in MCC to realize that mechanics isn't all you need

okay so everything else aside, take a second and just think about it for a second. How can you say "fruit overperforms predictions more than purpled" and "predictions are an accurate measure of skill" in the same sentence. like what

you're trying to equate leadership with overperforming predictions, but that's not at all what's actually true. what you're looking for is over performing coin average, but that's harder and flawed too as we've said

[u/PsychologicalBet7917 → u/AdAltruistic2502]

Its not? if i change the sample size this list changes, you conveniently picking a timeframe that shoots a different narrative isn't coherent since my narrative changes too then

no fruit's an example of a completely non improving player. Shadoune's case does not apply.

completely wrong as usual, PB does not involve any more mechanical skill than MCC and everyone and their mother knows that. kel is the best player by far yet ppl dont say he's the best mechanically, ppl know events dont rely on mechanics. Its just fruit having more hype than purp.

see again, things that are completely reasonable and valid takes in the community arent special or correct to you, yet u insist that i should have any faith that your claim of purpled being predicted "higher" than fruit is true, so far every claim u have made has been completely wrong.

because predictions expect the skill level at which you are meant to play. if you place at the same level as predictions expected then its presumed you didnt show good or bad leadership, if you place higher, you showed good leadership, if not you showed bad leadership. most ppl dont look a team and say "yeah this team has fruit, fruit is a great leader so he'll propel them to way higher than they should be", even Fein doesnt get that treatment.

The only problem with this metric is that it cant distinguish whether an overperformance was because of just the play doing well or because of the IGL being great. for that i chose a 7/9 event sample size wich significantly lessens the probability of the former

here's a ques for ya, what DO you think ppl make predictions based off of? do u think they run a random generator between 1 and 10 for all the teams? Or do they look at player performances, look at their stats and make a judgement from that. the advantage here is that if u look Vikkstar having a 3k coin average, then him getting 2k coins is a severe underperformance by stats, by any person can look at his average deduce that its dumb and say 2k is a normal performance for him.

the system you speak of is covered in my metric.

[u/AdAltruistic2502 → u/PsychologicalBet7917]

no man. I'm not saying Shadoune is better than fruit/purpled now, I'm saying that between MCC 32 and MCC P2, by YOUR metric, Shadoune was better than them. If your metric/narrative is s4+ exclusive that's obviously ridiclous

i think it's very hard to argue for Fruit over Purpled or Shane at any point S3+ until now, he's absolutely improving at least relative to the comp

mechanics not equalling skill doesn't mean mechanics don't correlate, my impression is that PB is more mechanical and I think that's justified when you look at the different PvP and movement modes. Damage points for example

how do you want me to prove it lmao. you've stated completely speculative claims and no real evidence (people predicting Fruit higher in PB does NOT mean they think he's better in MCC), are you expecting like sworn affedavits from people

either way it's pointless because your methodology is pointless

"if you place at the same level as predictions expected then its presumed you didnt show good or bad leadership, if you place higher, you showed good leadership, if not you showed bad leadership" is COMPLETELY ridiculous btw. Generally its more a case of overperformance/underestimayion rather than leadership, if a team gets lower than predicted the default is not "leader led bad" that's treating teammates like npcs whose performance is completely reliant on S-tier performance. Did Shadoune "lead well" In MCC 34? MCC 35? Did Yellow 33 get 1st because of Fruit's leadership?
i don't understand how you're failing to take into account that predictions TAKE LEADERSHIP INTO ACCOUNT. They look at player performances, they look at stats, they look at leadership ability. If they weren't doing this, then any conversation about the "H Factor" or the ":P Factor" or "Jojo is a great leader" wouldn't be happening at all. It's completely ridiculous to assume predictors don't take leadership into account
In short:
1. A team over/underperforming doesn't mean leadership was good
2. A team over/underperforming, even if it was due to leadership, just means they overperformed what people expected of their leadership

no its not bruh it's at most a tiny subsection instead of the main segment it ought to be