Champs rankings with stats

#1

YvngKurry

https://twitter.com/weltisgames/status/1567151450781847553?s=21&t=n9JkkhD-GhH-Ug2MOMCN_A

1-5 are extremely close.
What do you guys think?

#2

RickyIndian

0

Frags

+

–

I still think there is a lot of recency bias but then again, teams just don't play enough INTL matches to get enough data.

It gives us a rough idea of how teams are performing based on how they were expected to perform which is really cool.

#3

YvngKurry

0

Frags

+

–

Yea in the tweet he say they used a 60/40 bias towards recent stats

#4

spookmeister

0

Frags

+

–

"recency bias" yeah cuz maybe the stats are about the tournament thats happening rn

#6

RickyIndian

0

Frags

+

–

he made a list pre champs and it was based mainly off of copenhagen and LCQ which put 100T in front of OpTic and stuff like that

also by recency bias, im talking about LOUD being rated as the 5th best team in the tourney without even making it out of their group yet. this is because of their zeta stomp.

#8

spookmeister

0

Frags

+

–

Yes, but the teams in the list are ones from the tournament. thats why theres a recency bias. it doesnt matter rn that optic won reyk and fpx won copen. It simply matters how good the teams are right now

#9

RickyIndian

0

Frags

+

–

i just pointed out that weltis made one pre champs and it is very favored to recent matches, such as LCQ.

Weltis himself said that it isn't used to determine which team is better than another, it's used to measure how a team has improved in terms of performance.

#10

spookmeister

0

Frags

+

–

Yeah i guess so but my point still stands, that of course there is a recency bias due to the fact that the only teams listed are from a tournament happening rn.

#5

capital_d_colon

0

Frags

+

–

Cool. Though looking at the pre champs tier list makes you question it.

Probably the reason it's inaccurate before was the lack of games

#7

YvngKurry

0

Frags

+

–

60/40 bias towards recent champs results