Yep. I have seen 1 smurf in the last 2 seasons. Around 350-400 matches across both my accounts in gold/plat (diamond if I play open que).
Hardly a prevalent thing.
But please. Tell me what data you have that would prove me wrong, and what data I need to bring to the table.
I’m asking for your “flowchart”, “algorithm”, “formula” - i.e. your mental model of how you reach this conclusion. We can then work on plugging in real data and see what pops up.
We need you do to this so the goalposts stop changing.
And it’s OK to ask for logic help and logic coaching. While you game we do math. We can help you through this.
So that’s inadmissible because it’s totally anecdotal and unvalidated. Posting screenshots of the match lobbies would be helpful to your case.
Also what definition are you using for “smurfing”. ?
We are speaking about alts. The OP is talking about alt accounts. Alts generalize smurfs and smurfing. And alts are known to ruin ladder integrity no matter what their intent. This has to do with pdf differences of % players by SR vs. % accounts by SR, as well as many many other physical effects.
As is literally every cry of “smurf”.
I have never seen an alt ruin ladder, stop anyone improving, stop anyone climbing.
Well this is ironic freaking lol. How does that feel you hypocrite. You just lambasted me for your same excuse.
How about we stop the comments that are completely unsupported.
I mean you didn’t even try and bring evidence forward that we could inspect and debate. You’re making claims and just leaving them there without any backing.
What you’re doing isn’t constructive towards building a community that knows appreciably what the actual/live conditions are.
You said:
Can you please provide those facts? How did you derive those chances? How did you count the smurf frequency. How are you defining the smurfing?
Cheers and thanks for your contributions.
The community appreciates it.
The beauty is you don’t have to see it.
Just like you don’t see the roundness of the earth.
There is a simple formula that calculates the amount of disruption each and every alt will impart. It’s conservative and presents you with the minimum possible disruption. Regardless or their direction, intent, etc.
Would you like me to provide it or would you like to derive it for yourself?
Since you claim to have reached valid conclusions, I’ll assume you can show the math without having to link a receipt from 3 years ago. So again, please tell us the math you used to conclude alts aren’t an issue. I’m not asking for data, I’m asking for the math you would plug data into.
Yeah you do. It is called satellites and photography.
Ok so we’re off to a good start.
Could you:
Explain your reasoning mechanisms and what parameters go into them.
*smurf accounts (20 characters.)
You clearly dont know how burden of proof works here mate, because I dont see ANY evidence in the OP statement. Any replays? any screenshots? anything?
So yeah, you are barking at the wrong tree here pal.
Moving the goalpost much? Re-read pal, dont get triggered and start asking for things that dont apply:
Go on.
Do your research since you clearly dont know what is that about.
Dont thank me. I dont work for you and I wont do your work for you so if you choose to be in denial because I am not providing any links, live your dream bud 
see I’ve seen a couple of smurf accounts here and there… but you guys have to be exaggerating about how hard it is to win against a smurf. like not all smurfs are top 10 players with insane aim/mechanics. like most of thema re actually just high diamond or masters. They’re not that crazy good.
I’m asking how you are fact-checking the OP statements.
You said:
So the burden of proof is on you to back up your own statements.
Regards.
Dude this is the last reply unless you provide something of substance.
Replying for the sake of replying and “asking for evidence” is pointless when :
1 - The burden of proof is not on me
2 - I already told you to do your research and the keywords for it.
No.
Because I am not the first one on throwing claims, OP is. Hence he has to provide replays at least.
Unless you read the article, dont @ me. Dont waste my time. No more replies will be sent because you just want to reply as fast as possible.
I don’t think he understands the concept that you need to prove their is an issue first.
Still waiting for that day.
But it is you who provided no substance.
Let us review what you said:
The burden of proof is 100% on you to support those statements.
They’re independent from what the OP has said.
Try again.
They are not. They are countering what the OP said.
Now, the job is for the OP to prove evidence that the counter claim is incorrect.
Until that happens, nothing needs to be said.
Then you are welcome to ask them to substantiate why there is an issue.
And you are welcome to debate what they provide.
But when you conclude there isn’t an issue, you are denying the possibility that there is one. You’re not being logical here.
So provide reasons for your “denying the premise”. Thanks in advance.
wait was this your evidence?
People did. Nothing came of it.
Probably because their isn’t any way to prove their claim that smurfing even happened in their games, let alone it being common.
I think you have brain farted yourself into a tizzy… no one has said smurf don’t exist, they most certainly do, and should be dealt with quickly.
It just isn’t that prevalent. As Dota found when they made a big PR fuss about making it bannable.
The only difference in the view is a matter of scale.
1 side, tilted player irrationally making rage claims
-vs-
1 player looking at it in the cold light of day with logic.
No. The OP complaints fall under the guise of a more broader claim of “alts disrupting ladder integrity”.
Here you’re excluding the middle, denying the premises, and failing the null-hypothesis tests by saying:
This is fallacious. Is that really your evidence? Like one counter-example about alts ruining matches and you short-circuit to wrong and can leave the discussion. Why would you conclude the negative of the OP statements without any evidence to conclude so? Why not be open to the possibility?
Please explain how you concluded they were outright wrong instead just unvalidated.
You also seem to be hinging on:
Could you please show some math that backs up this claim?
All smurfs are alts. And every alt ruins the mapping of %players to SR.
And it is possible to quantify by exactly how much.
If you don’t know the difference between alt accounts and smurf accounts… then you really shouldn’t be trying to make any claim.