I was refering to scores. If someone goes 20-0-0, literally all that means is that they were around to last hit 20 people, not that they are good at the game. Yes kills and deaths matter, no they are not the end all of this game.

Also, you don't win this game by killing them, you win this game by killing their base. One often leads to the other, but there is definitely a difference.

Yeah but most of the time you end the game because the other team is dead...otherwise they wouldn't let you kill their nexus. And most of the time the people with high records like 18-4, normally also have like 6 assists, I've yet to see a person go 20-0-0. Saying k/d doesn't matter is ridiculous. I don't know why people say that...If you killed them more than they killed you (assuming same cs) you have the upper hand...

Team fights usually decide the game, and if your team loses a teamfight at 62:00, you can pretty much /surrender, and cry over your 60s rez. And of course, how do you win team fights? Either ganking them 5v4 or less, and/or having stronger champions. How do you get stronger champions? By not feeding them, getting a lot of cs, and killing them. If a team with more kills never pushes, then yes they'll lose but assuming both are competent, the one with more kills/cs normally wins...Or if the other team does it's close like 44-46 or something.

To those that thinks kills matter: I was in a premade team with 4 fortifies, 5 teleports and a ghost, got first blood with the tele to ward trick, then by the end of the game, it was roughly, 72 kills for their team, and 24 for us. We didnt lose a single tower, and won.

So your anecdotal evidence trumps the other large majority of games where kills matter? Hm..1 game = proof. I see.

Your evidence that your ELO is incorrectly low is also anecdotal. You posted scores from games where you did well but your teammates did not.

Anyways, if you're really doing that well often than your ELO will certainly go up over time, just be patient and hang in there!

This.

I often get lose streaks, but shortly after I raise in Elo, beating my top Elo. Very frustrating though.

ok this game is based on teamwork.... i have said this in a diff thread but every part of the game matters. kills, deaths, TEAMWORK! ofcourse kills will give you the edge but regardless if there is no teamwork or smart team fights then kills wont mean very much... for ex/ your team could have 3 times the kills of the opponent team but regardless if your squishies are the first ones in or ganked and focused properly. all your kills go down the drain. In LoL i will go as far to say that every thing in this game counts but the most important above all else is TEAMWORK! Its not k/d or assists.... in my opinion if you went 20/0/0 and your team has a high volume of assists then maybe it was your fault you guys lost... the reason i say that is the fact that this is a team game and if you spread those kill out to your team and stopped last hitting champs and let your team get kills in ganks you prob would have stood a better chance. a fed team all around is better then one thats over fed... jus sayin...

It's funny how similar these forums are to poker forums as far as whining about short term luck. Let me give you a dose of reality, Fight club style.

You are not special.
You are not unique.
Countless people have experienced the same thing you are experiencing.

People complain and complain about short term ratings, wake up. In poker you have to play 100,000 hands in order to really have a good grasp on your winrate, i'm not making a random number up, or exaggerating, you literally need to play 100,000 hands in order to really get rid of the variance, and analyze your win rate. EVEN THEN, you can have a good 100k hands.

In league of legends I don't know the magic number to really curb variance, you'd have to ask solo queue junkies, my guess would be around 300-400 games. But the problem is(which is generally the same in poker) is that your last 50-100 games, your skill level is going to be way higher than your first 50-100 games. So in a sense, the majority of players will never realize their true ELO, because their ELO will always be variance averaged to a lower number due to their lower skill level during those games, causing them to lose games that their new talent wouldnt have been lost.

Than what metric would have him use to prove that his rating should be higher?

And thus lies the trick, because you would say "his rating, obviously". A well supported argument is not circular. What metrics - of a measurably nature - do you want him to post to prove he should be higher rated than he is?

Name them, and we'll see if his up to your challenge. I'm betting that people who claim Elo Hell doesn't exist won't be able to name any measurably metric - thats because luck (or rating) is only measured by your rating.

FP Yi over and over with the intent of Forcing down turrets =P

Hmmmm.