alpine just signed a lvl 56 dot. dropping like demoting rocks
Forum > Pro Leagues > Day 46 EL
Originally posted by chronoaug
alpine just signed a lvl 56 dot. dropping like demoting rocks
A Devonport farm dot at that....
alpine just signed a lvl 56 dot. dropping like demoting rocks
A Devonport farm dot at that....
Bladnach
offline
offline
Originally posted by Plankton
Originally posted by chronoaug
alpine just signed a lvl 56 dot. dropping like demoting rocks
A Devonport farm dot at that....
i'm in ur farm team
stealin' ur dots
Originally posted by chronoaug
alpine just signed a lvl 56 dot. dropping like demoting rocks
A Devonport farm dot at that....
i'm in ur farm team
stealin' ur dots
fast420
offline
offline
Originally posted by chronoaug
i'm in ur farm team
stealin' ur dots
times are rough in the streets for a pimp
i'm in ur farm team
stealin' ur dots
times are rough in the streets for a pimp
joemiken
offline
offline
Originally posted by bhall43
Lincoln loses to dotball syndicate in final. Gg wl see ya next season.
Needs a Lincoln farewell thread.
Lincoln loses to dotball syndicate in final. Gg wl see ya next season.
Needs a Lincoln farewell thread.
Originally posted by bug03
Originally posted by evileyez
every season i think Sofia is making up some ground .. and then you always go and do this
You got us by 10 pts
Our 2 C's are beasts
Originally posted by evileyez
every season i think Sofia is making up some ground .. and then you always go and do this
You got us by 10 pts
Our 2 C's are beasts
bug03
offline
offline
Originally posted by .spider.
Our 2 C's are beasts
Without looking, I'd bet it had more to do with my terrible p/k
Our 2 C's are beasts
Without looking, I'd bet it had more to do with my terrible p/k
Originally posted by bug03
Originally posted by .spider.
Our 2 C's are beasts
Without looking, I'd bet it had more to do with my terrible p/k
EL is so LOL
Originally posted by .spider.
Our 2 C's are beasts
Without looking, I'd bet it had more to do with my terrible p/k
EL is so LOL
GMathiasf
offline
offline
Last season, no team that started the season in the top 7 of effective level won a playoff game.
ANumber1Roy
offline
offline
Originally posted by GMathiasf
Last season, no team that started the season in the top 7 of effective level won a playoff game.
Further proof it doesn't really mean anything.
Last season, no team that started the season in the top 7 of effective level won a playoff game.
Further proof it doesn't really mean anything.
GMathiasf
offline
offline
Originally posted by ANumber1Roy
Further proof it doesn't really mean anything.
I wouldn't go that far. It means something. It would mean a lot more if we took out Ps/Ks as just a start. And probably include all the dots, not just the top half. Add to that some sort of calculation including AEQ. There is definitely a correlation between higher effective level and success, but it's certainly not absolute.
Further proof it doesn't really mean anything.
I wouldn't go that far. It means something. It would mean a lot more if we took out Ps/Ks as just a start. And probably include all the dots, not just the top half. Add to that some sort of calculation including AEQ. There is definitely a correlation between higher effective level and success, but it's certainly not absolute.
ANumber1Roy
offline
offline
Originally posted by GMathiasf
Originally posted by ANumber1Roy
Further proof it doesn't really mean anything.
I wouldn't go that far. It means something. It would mean a lot more if we took out Ps/Ks as just a start. And probably include all the dots, not just the top half. Add to that some sort of calculation including AEQ. There is definitely a correlation between higher effective level and success, but it's certainly not absolute.
Your explanation is more of what I mean. I personally don't put much weight into effective levels at the WL stage since almost every team that got here isn't far different in builds with the exception of maybe a few teams.
Originally posted by ANumber1Roy
Further proof it doesn't really mean anything.
I wouldn't go that far. It means something. It would mean a lot more if we took out Ps/Ks as just a start. And probably include all the dots, not just the top half. Add to that some sort of calculation including AEQ. There is definitely a correlation between higher effective level and success, but it's certainly not absolute.
Your explanation is more of what I mean. I personally don't put much weight into effective levels at the WL stage since almost every team that got here isn't far different in builds with the exception of maybe a few teams.
I am very surprised that Alpine is at 4th with 18 dots that are younger than 400 days (meaning 6 more boosts or more). Compared to the top three that has 2, 1 and 4 respectively (Lincoln, Hali, HHWC).
Originally posted by cavalier
I am very surprised that Alpine is at 4th with 18 dots that are younger than 400 days (meaning 6 more boosts or more). Compared to the top three that has 2, 1 and 4 respectively (Lincoln, Hali, HHWC).
Your eff. level care meter is off the charts.
I am very surprised that Alpine is at 4th with 18 dots that are younger than 400 days (meaning 6 more boosts or more). Compared to the top three that has 2, 1 and 4 respectively (Lincoln, Hali, HHWC).
Your eff. level care meter is off the charts.
HEY YOU GUYS
offline
offline
Originally posted by cavalier
I am very surprised that Alpine is at 4th with 18 dots that are younger than 400 days (meaning 6 more boosts or more). Compared to the top three that has 2, 1 and 4 respectively (Lincoln, Hali, HHWC).
I am very surprised Chocolate Blaze is 40 points higher than anyone in WL
wait no i'm not.......... i'm lying
I am very surprised that Alpine is at 4th with 18 dots that are younger than 400 days (meaning 6 more boosts or more). Compared to the top three that has 2, 1 and 4 respectively (Lincoln, Hali, HHWC).
I am very surprised Chocolate Blaze is 40 points higher than anyone in WL
wait no i'm not.......... i'm lying
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
