Win-rates can matter if you can show there is a robust representation of all skill levels for each race and that each race is equally represented in skill.
It can matter if properly standardized. I did just that awhile back. This was from December of 2020:
Here is a fun chart:
https://i.imgur.com/iRH4z9F.png
These are the elo rankings of “pro” players active in 2020 with at least 100 games played. The rankings are standardized: the ranking of each player and for each matchup is subtracted from the mean of that matchup and divided by the standard deviation of that matchup. This allows for comparisons between different distributions shapes/means. That is, if a player is 2 standard deviations from the mean in PvP, he should be roughly 2 standar…
By the way, for a player of 800 elo (roughly Serral’s level) a Zerg would be 727.2 ZvP and a Protoss would be 736.8 PvZ. That would be a 2.76% win-rate disparity given equal skill.
Guess what the EU GM win-rate disparity is between Zerg and Protoss? 56.9 - 55.8 = 1.1%. But, that’s an average of (ZvZ + ZvT + ZvP) / 3 = Average. Let’s plug in our numbers from the pro scene:
(ZvZ=50 + ZvT=49.08 + ZvP=48.62) / 3 = 49.23% ZvX average win-rate.
(PvP=50 + PvT=50 + ZvP=51.38) / 3 = 50.46% PvX av…