I doubt a lot that anyone has 99% of Rufus's skill level

"In order to make 2400, let alone 2500, someone with Rufus' or Buns' or BBJ's caliber would just have to play above average players disguised as 1900 or something like that all the time. At that point, if someone did reach 2400, that might call into question if the opponents they played actually were the elite players on this site, kinda like how some peoples' runs at the 1v1 ladder are called into question (Johnny Silverhand and Phobos for example, the most entertaining and hilarious thread I've read on the forum ever"

Been a couple years since I played on either ladder so my information is out of date, but there are two major differences between the 1v1 ladder and the MTL. First, is the players that play on each. The MTL consistently has more of the strat community on it, because it's more fun than playing the same template every game and is not based around runs. Second, the difference in rating calculation makes it so that people can get very high 1v1 ladder scores by playing well over a relatively small sample size (probably 10 serious games of a 20 game run), and conversely their scores become entrenched if they stay on the ladder for a long time incentivizing people to play a run of games and then immediately leave.

Thus, I think it's very unlikely you get an "illegitimate" run to 2400 or 2500 on the MTL. Anyone who achieves that will be in fantastic form, but definitely will have earned it.

Edited 11/21/2022 14:37:38

It's funny how everyone is talking about unreachable 2400 rating and not about 2300 anymore. In order to do that I had to go for 32-game win streak against MTL's top 20 players. Afterwards, I've hit the mark at least 2 more times.

Of course 2500 rating currently seems impossible, because it practically is. Even if you start "the run" at 2200 rating, you would need like 100+ game win streak against top 20

Edited 11/21/2022 15:30:01

Okay maybe not that high, but I was just making a point why it should be important to play above a certain level, not just peak past a certain level. peaking past a level could very well be because of circumstances, like who one happened to play, which maps you played on during that time (if in the MTL), etc.

Edited 11/21/2022 20:06:17

I still don’t understand why the 1v1 ladder uses such a terrible rating system. If a much more traditional Elo or Glicko rating system was used there wouldn’t be so much nonsense.

Is this MW-Elo (which includes activity bonus) or Elo? I think the two have to be interpreted differently because near the top the activity bonus can move people up a few ranks above or below their real skill. With MW-Elo, 1500 is well below average.

I agree and disagree.
Ratings are always relative to the player pool, which is a limitation of any player system and makes it so that ratings cannot be compared over time as the overall level of the player pool may have decreased or, more likely, increased.

Given the same player pool, you are definitely correct, indeed MW-Elo will give a bonus of 0-80 points.
However, the MTL / MDL always had a smaller, more experienced and generally better player pool. Most people who are at the back in the 1v1 ladder won't ever play MTL.

In numbers: the average player on the MTL will have a rating that is probably about 50 points higher than the average player on the 1v1 ladder, but the average player on MTL will be expected to rank way above average on the 1v1 (on average). I remember when I played both at the same time, a long time ago, that difference was easily 300 points.



EDIT: I collected data for people currently ranked on both ladders, data from the last 20 or so minutes, manual check, and it seems I stand corrected. Among people ranked in both ladders at this moment, there are even more people with a higher rating in the MTL, surprisingly.

player               1v1     MTL    diff
Fralex              1921    1662    +259
MoriOri             2343    2089    +254
Egmont              1440    1217    +223
simone              1815    1656    +159
MinjO               1649    1535    +114
clamburglar         1344    1232    +112
Timinator           2161    2087     +74
ilija               1696    1642     +54
Baseplate207x       1609    1562     +47
Corsaro             1820    1780     +40

GLiTchY             1660    1684     -24
NepCoV1:9           1489    1522     -33
Sketch              1443    1525     -82
CrYsT               1653    1770    -117
Charlie Carter      1274    1411    -137
Himoon10            1406    1551    -145
Big Wave            1275    1424    -149
San-Sayan           1542    1704    -162
exe                 1425    1621    -196
TheThedde           1217    1572    -355
Alien                832    1329    -497
Splat                954    1498    -544
Captain MAK Sparrow  853    1452    -599

Edited 11/23/2022 16:16:41

My difference in recent MTL and 1 v 1 Ladder performance approximates 300 points as well

Regarding MW's edit: I think it's pretty clear that when it comes to high ratings, everyone will be quite significantly lower on MTL than on 1 v 1 Ladder. There are imaginable effects that can lead to a different result in around average ratings, but not at the top. Or do you know a counter example to that, say, someone with at least 1900 MTL rating who ranks lower than that on the 1 v 1 Ladder?