what!

"Why do you feel the need to explain exactly how they did it as if that implies that they somehow don't deserve it. Let it go, man."

It seems fairly clear that they indeed, don't deserve it.

Perhaps looking at it from a logical angle rather than just going, "Lol, gui mad. Y u so mad Gui?!?", might help. Intentionally stalling games you're losing so that they are completed after the games you're doing better on certainly appears to result in higher rankings on the ladder than it should, and thus leads to undeserved ratings. That's not to say Oliebol is bad. He'd certainly not. He'd certainly beat me, 100 times out of 100. Saying someone isn't as good as their rating would lead people to believe is not inherently stating that they are bad.

Much like I can say someone is overrated without implying that they're in any way, shape, or form, bad.

I think it's perfectly sensible to have games be listed based on the order in which they were started rather than order in which they were completed.