The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
Raymond_Reddington
Con (against)
Winning
32 Points

my debate stats are highly formiddable

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 7 votes the winner is...
Raymond_Reddington
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/3/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 461 times Debate No: 55984
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (7)

 

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, a requirement is that you have to know how the stats work. to be honest, i'm looking for someone who can 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.
Raymond_Reddington

Con

According to Merriam-Webster formidable means "causing fear, dread, or apprehension". For this debate I will have to be brutally honest. Your debate statistics mean none of these. This doesn't help you at all. In fact, they are practically the complete opposite. You have 220 losses 59 ties and 33 wins. Your percentile is not working for you at all. It is based only on your wins. You could have 10 billion losses and 32 wins and you would be above the 99th percentile. Your win ratio is 13.04% and your elo is 1133. People are not "scared" to debate you. People jump at the slightest chance to debate you. You have completed 312 debates, but me going against you is probably considered "noob sniping" by the majority of DDO users and I myself am probably still considered a noob. Here is a good analogy. Regular noob sniping: NBA basketball player(pro) goes 1 on 1 against a High School Basketball Player(noob). This debate: High School Basketball Player(noob) goes 1 on 1 against against a blind baby(ultra-noob). This is a new phenomenon known as Baby-sniping. I literally laughed when I saw your debate statistics. ELO is determined by a formula Ore-Ele (might have been Airmax) posted in a forum. You can search it if you want to. Basically wins help you and losses hurt you. The magnitude of the help/hurt is dependent on whether or not you instigated and the skill of your opponent. It probably takes effort to get statistics that bad. You being "laid back" is no excuse. Your statistics are still not formidable. In a normal debate I would do significant research and spend alot of time writing the debate. Your statistics are so weak I will do neither. I officially recommend that due to your poor debate statistics, which are far from formidable, that you concede right now and walk away with the only loss of dignity being that joke you call your debate statistics.
Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

i looked up 'wins' and 'percentile' in the debate leadership board, and saw that they were directly related, proportional. i was skeptical that the percentile was calculated that way, as you seemed to indicate.
but they are, so i concede the debate.
Raymond_Reddington

Con

Can you just type something for the next round so we can get this debate finished
Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

how much wood would a woodchuck chuck, if peter piper picked a peck of pickled peppers?
Raymond_Reddington

Con

Can you can a can as a canner can can a can?
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
dairygirl4u2cRaymond_ReddingtonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.
Vote Placed by ChadIrvin 2 years ago
ChadIrvin
dairygirl4u2cRaymond_ReddingtonTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's stats ar terrible.
Vote Placed by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
dairygirl4u2cRaymond_ReddingtonTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro concedes
Vote Placed by NiamC 2 years ago
NiamC
dairygirl4u2cRaymond_ReddingtonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 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: Concession, plus Con had better arguments
Vote Placed by Ajab 2 years ago
Ajab
dairygirl4u2cRaymond_ReddingtonTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: The only one who actually made a proper argument, he gave a good enough refutation and used his definition to prove himself right. Also he's Alan Shore, you cant argue with him...
Vote Placed by KatieKat99 2 years ago
KatieKat99
dairygirl4u2cRaymond_ReddingtonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:16 
Reasons for voting decision: Why would someone even do this to themselves?
Vote Placed by Tore_Mihror 2 years ago
Tore_Mihror
dairygirl4u2cRaymond_ReddingtonTied
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 had the only "real" argument, and he defined a word. Where is the source?