So I just came across an interesting relevation.

SDS

Scrolling through my trophy list looking for the lowest % of platinum trophies I noticed that MLB 16 and MLB 19, both have a Platinum trophy earned % of 0.1% for different reasons. 16 for the absurd "win 20 games in a single draft in Battle Royale" which was practically impossible. But for 19? "Welcome to the Chip", a trophy for reaching Championship Series (800 elo in DD) and only 0.6% of trophies earned among everyone who had played the game.

The relevation? If you can reach CS, you're likely better than 98-99% of the people who play the game.

SDS

Your calculation is faulty. You haven't taken into account the % of players who do not compete online (like me).

The good news is that your level of math proficiency probably qualifies you for a top job at the CDC or the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

SDS

@tigermoose93_mlbts said in So I just came across an interesting relevation.:

The good news is that your level of math proficiency probably qualifies you for a top job at the CDC or the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Pure cringe.

SDS

@tigermoose93_mlbts said in So I just came across an interesting relevation.:

Your calculation is faulty. You haven't taken into account the % of players who do not compete online (like me).

Unless you play on HoF or Legend I don't think any of them would be capable of making it to CS. This is taking the entire playerbase, offline and online, so not faulty at all. I think any person who can make CS would beat an offline player.

SDS

@ikasnu_psn said in So I just came across an interesting relevation.:

@tigermoose93_mlbts said in So I just came across an interesting relevation.:

Your calculation is faulty. You haven't taken into account the % of players who do not compete online (like me).

Unless you play on HoF or Legend I don't think any of them would be capable of making it to CS. This is taking the entire playerbase, offline and online, so not faulty at all. I think any person who can make CS would beat an offline player.

Again, your logic is faulty. The denominator within your equation has to be adjusted to support your hypothesis. It includes players who do not compete online and you'd have to subtract them from your equation to validate your argument.

In other words, players who do not play online are not eligible for inclusion in the numerator; yet they're factored into the denominator of your equation. That invalidates your hypothesis.

Loosely, only a tenth to a quarter of the user base likely competes online. Therefore, you're over-inflating the value of reaching CS anywhere by 25% to 90%.

The really good news is that your ability to compare apples to oranges qualifies you a top job with a major media company in their newsroom.

SDS

I’d love to see an offline player facing Cabrera in CS. Very interesting.

SDS

Again, compared to the offline playerbase, the CS player will win in almost all instances. I stand by the statement that if you're capable of making CS, you're likely better than 99% of the playerbase.