Spoiler: listen to this; it's quite appropriate for this sincere exposure
VIDEO

\

So we all know about infamy right? You get it from winning and lose it from losing in ranked matches. You may have also noticed most people, about 95% of the players have almost a 1:1 win/lose ratio. So that means we all usually win half of the time and lose the other half. We all know this. Let's say that somebody wins a game, then loses a game, then wins a game, then loses a game. And they can never win two battles in a row. This leads to them losing the infamy they have just gained from the previous round each game. They will, therefore, never gain infamy.

So what's the point? What if you truly cannot win two battles in a row? Then infamy is pointless. It does not matter how many battles you have.. it only matter that you can take two steps forward and two steps back. Even the highest level NML players usually all have a 1:1 w/l ratio. So if everybody's ratio is the same, what really makes the difference between a NML player and a rookie? Statistically, nothing.

Infamy is, therefore, only a representation of not how many battles you can win, but it is a measure of breaking out of the win once, lose once, repeat, kind of system. So according to obvious mathematics, it is literally impossible to gain infamy obviously. Unless, somebody loses a battle, then wins a battle, then wins a battle, then loses a battle, then wins again, then loses a battle, then wins and wins and wins again, but loses once again. Using this algorithm, we can decide that gaining infamy is literally impossible statistically speaking from a statistic point of view.

disclaimer: this thread is about 85% joke. I'm sincerely sorry if I put it in the wrong section and you can go ahead and move it. (and remove this bold text.) The other 15% is math and math is not a joke. Math doesn't lie. Math is our lord and savior. That was also a joke but partially not a joke. This thread would not exist without math because computers compute. Click to expand...