The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
SPENCERJOYAGE14
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

i am a highly formiddable debater- despite many poor stats

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
SPENCERJOYAGE14
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/31/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 515 times Debate No: 55831
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

dairygirl4u2c

Pro

if you look at my percentile ranking, im 99+% ranked. it's so high, that you can count numberically, that i'm just under 100th place in the ranking. in a realm of thousands upon thousands, that is not bad at all.

if you look at my ELO and win ratio, you might conclude that perhaps i aint so great.

i could get into reasons why those are so low, given my laid back nature, but i'm mainly interested in focusing on the stats.

also, to be honest, i'm looking for someone with knowledge of how it all works, to tell me why i'm wrong, or misguided. cause i dont know enough of how it works.
i do see that ELO says it considers rankings of opponents etc, and i'm low on that. but i wonder if that's included in the percentile, cause i've done some great debates with extremely formidable opponents.
SPENCERJOYAGE14

Con


I look forward to debating this.


I will be defining formiddable as the misspelling of the word “formidable” meaning: [1] causing fear, apprehension, or dread.


Some synonyms of formidable are [2], [3]: alarming, dangerous, frightening, ghastly, hair-raising, horrendous, horrible, horrifying, scary, terrible, and nightmarish.


Today I will be looking past her status (as this debate calls for) and through her debates and showing you why all her debates are not at all scary.


This debate will be based on personal opinion as it is called for.


I await Pro’s case/




[1] http://dictionary.reference.com...


[2] http://www.merriam-webster.com...


[3]http://thesaurus.com...


Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

"but i'm mainly interested in focusing on the stats"

actually the debate called for looking at the stats only. as i said above in quotaitons.

also, you are creating a strawman as your means to win. you define formiddable as 'causing fear" etc, and then go on to state reasons that you do not have fear. if you defined formiddable as something more objective, we could have been focusing on percentile v ELO etc, as was the defined focus of the debate.

i also asked for someone with knowledge of how the stat system worked. who can say why the percentile is so high, when the ELO and win ratio is so low. stuff like that.

it looks like you are heading in the wrong direction, and vioalting the t erms of the debate.
SPENCERJOYAGE14

Con


Looking at the resolution of the debate it says, “i am a highly formiddable debater- despite many poor stats.” When you look at the word despite it traditionally means looking past something. So because you did not clarify your resolution I thought that’s what it meant.


“you define formiddable as 'causing fear" etc, and then go on to state reasons that you do not have fear.”


Because you did not define terms I thought it was my place to. You define terms to make sure you both members of this debate understand what this debate is about.


“i also asked for someone with knowledge of how the stat system worked. who can say why the percentile is so high, when the ELO and win ratio is so low. stuff like that.”


The equation for elo calculation is:


W = winner's original ELO


L = loser's original ELO


D = change in ELO


D = 100*(W+9L)/10W


When you take a debate and you lose your elo goes down, the more debates you lose the lower your elo gets. Because you’ve lost 223 that would be the reason your elo is 1,101.


“it looks like you are heading in the wrong direction, and vioalting the t erms of the debate.”


I’m sorry that you think I have violated the unsaid terms of this debate. If you would like you could define terms and put down rules and we might redo this debate.


Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

i did clarify what i was looking for in the opening statement. i acknowledge reading the title alone one could mistake what was being asked for.
you did engage in the stats, but focused on the ELO and didn't even touch on the percentile. that was also what i asked for. i'm not too interested in this debate any more though, cause another debateer explained how percentile works.
SPENCERJOYAGE14

Con

Well it's great you found out. Maybe next time you should start a forum post on a topic like this.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Sashil 2 years ago
Sashil
I'm really perplexed that PRO has been here on this website for almost six years now and has not made a single forum post.Questions as such would be better addressed and clarified if you post them in forums(http://www.debate.org...).Starting debates on topics you are not knowledgeable about only creates the risk of getting an unnecessary loss.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
dairygirl4u2cSPENCERJOYAGE14Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: pro could not prove herself to be a formidable debater
Vote Placed by Truth_seeker 2 years ago
Truth_seeker
dairygirl4u2cSPENCERJOYAGE14Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Con defined better terms than Pro and made better calculations.