Originally Posted by WarlordAlpha
Huh, that's interesting. I always just had the feeling that a person's Normal Elo would be slightly inflated. Ignoring games with sub-30 players, I would have guessed it had something to do with the ratio of normal to ranked games played, especially with regard to the number of players who play like 75%+ of their games in either ranked or normals. But if they're generally very close I guess everything must be more balanced than I ever thought it would be.
Being a numbers person and not being able to see the numbers is tough
At any rate, I'm definitely not the first and certainly won't be the last to say this, but thanks for keeping this thread going / replying to other threads around here. Getting some insight on matchmaking and player behavior and such is pretty neat.
A multiplicative or additive adjust would still count as correlation. If you have someone's Normal Elo, it seems like you ought to be able to guess something about their Ranked Elo, and vice versa, provided you have a large enough dataset.
My guess is that the complicating factor lies in "approach to Normal games". I'd wager that players fall into a few different categories as to how they play Normals, e.g.:
(1) Serious Business -- play Normal like Ranked
(2) Casual -- use a broader range of Champions in Normal, and test out new builds, but otherwise play it a lot like Ranked
(3) Experimental -- play Ranked most of the time. When playing Normal, are just about always trying something bizarre, like triple-mid or Surprise Tank Teemo.
(4) Team -- play Ranked solo but Normals as part of a team, or vice versa