Are You Only As Good As Your Ratio?

[ArcenimTF]

A lot of players focus on keeping their ratio as good as they can get it, and while I agree that a 1/2 ratio or better is impressive, I disagree that a player's ratio determines their skill level. For example, my ratio is around 1/8 but on average when I'm playing SG I win one out of every 4 or 5 games, sometimes better. But everyone has those days where they can't get anything going and lose a lot of games because of unforeseen problems. I play a lot of SG and have a lot of these days, which makes my ratio stay around 1/8. People constantly underestimate me because of my ratio when I am actually a fairly decent PvPer, and I think that it is unfair for someone with a 1/3 ratio to say they are "better" than someone with, say, a 1/5. What do you guys think? Can someone be a good PvPer and have an average or worse than average ratio? Or are players really considered "better" because they have more wins and less deaths than others?

 

[Sulfur]

I'm worse than my ratio, my ratio was 1/6, where I have the potential for a 1/3. I don't care about stats, but I got a reset and will be tryharding once my computer gets fixed up.

I don't believe stats project the players skill level, but a player would be looked on better if he/her had good stats.

 

[RasclartsRELOADED]

For example, my ratio is around 1/8 but on average when I'm playing SG I win one out of every 4 or 5 games, sometimes better.

no, you win around 1 in 8 games on average

 

[KiDD]

I'm a better PvPer than my ratio suggests. My ratio would be better, for "obvious reasons".

Maybe at one point statistics reflected a player's skill, but now it just isn't the case, unfortunately.

 

[RasclartsRELOADED]

I'm a better PvPer than my ratio suggests. My ratio would be better, for obvious reasons.

Maybe at one point statistics reflected a players skill, but now it just isn't the case, unfortunately.

ye lol just look at AFistsOfSteel

 

[DE5T1NY]

It's annoying af cos rn I got 405/2493 (just about a 1 in 6) and in a month I won 200 games out of 500 when I went complete tryhard
I've lost so many times to teams of 3 + more or hackers ;-;
Ratio doesn't mean much.

 

[Luka]

This post! I keep getting underestimated because of my horrible ratio, I can't really complain as I'm not the best pvper but I'd say I'm better than my ratio suggests haha, and a lot of players are sadly being boosted by people on their alts nowadays :/

 

[smashmaster]

Now that the new leaderboards are out and I have rank 50 on legacy I just mess around...team,challenges, and what not so really I bet my new W/L wont be so good. A lot of the old players if you check there stats don't have good stats I would say we really don't care anymore but some of them are still really gooooood!

 

[Kellyys]

I really don't know if i'm better than my ratio ._. I have a 1/2.4 and I basically got 4-6 kills every game I won.

 

[ArcenimTF]

I'm a better PvPer than my ratio suggests. My ratio would be better, for obvious reasons.

Maybe at one point statistics reflected a players skill, but now it just isn't the case, unfortunately.

Yes, same here. With all the teams and hackers on, nothing is certain in a game anymore.

 

[ArcenimTF]

It's annoying af cos rn I got 405/2493 (just about a 1 in 6) and in a month I won 200 games out of 500 when I went complete tryhard
I've lost so many times to teams of 3 + more or hackers ;-;
Ratio doesn't mean much.

Yes that's what I've been dealing with. When nothing crazy happens I usually win around 7 games a day out of 30-40. But a lot of these well-known PvPers (ItsAustennn, BiboyQG, CreeperFarts, etc.) really focus on their ratio. I don't think it's really necessary for them to do that because everyone already knows they're a lot better at PvP than a lot of us will ever be.

 

[DE5T1NY]

Look at justahotdog. He was the first person to reach 2000 wins in US and now he hardly has a 1 in 10. cscoop had over 1k wins and now his ratio is awful