LogFAQs > #913561862

Haste_2 posted...

Sorry Lopen, but I've got to side with creative here. Mario went from 47% on Crono to 54% between 2004 and 2005. That's a 7% swing without SFF. Add in SFF and I think a 10% swing is possible. Samus beating Mario in 2004 seems very plausible, if you assume Samus didn't gain much between '04 and '05.

I think that's a big if, is the main thing. You have to completely ignore Kirby and Ganondorf and then arbitrarily have Samus boost in 06 after everyone else boosted in 05 to make her clowning the men's half in 06 make sense. I do agree if you could trace a root to Mario series specifically like a big Mario game release, and discard Kirby and Ganondorf looking better, yeah, a 10% swing becomes less weird to stomach because double dipping would possibly make some sense, but even then... I would say it gets more and more difficult to successfully make a vote swing the further off you gotta go. It's not "only 3 more percent" it's 3 percent on top of the already almost never seen 7 percent. It's also more impressive to make a percentage swing from a lower starting percentage as your reference point. Like going from 40 to 50 is a more impressive than going from 45 to 55, even if they're both shifting the total by 10%. 40 to 50 is a 25% growth of your vote share while 45 to 55 is about 22%.

Throw all this together and yeah it stretches the limits of plausibility to the point where I'm thinking it's more likely that Mario > Samus in 04 with 60% than Samus > Mario in 04 with any percent. If we're talking "these should be completely non-controversial claims" I would say Samus beating Mario should fit that bill more than Mario not being able to break 55% in 04. I think neither one is completely non-controversial, mind you.

creativename posted...

Predicting Mario to win with 60% was *partially* luck if your reasoning had nothing to do with Mario rising substantially in relative strength to Samus. Not even a question. I am obviously not saying picking Mario to win via rSFF was luck.

So do you think if Mario got 60% here, that would have somehow helped *my* position? Obviously not. The better Samus did here, the more one can say SFF is wonky. The way you are looking at this match is just bizarre.

Well I seem to be remembering the idea of rSFF being considered something that was debatable even as recently as this year (Bowser vs Kirby for example I feel like consensus among most people aside from me and like transience was that Bowser was just stronger than Kirby this year and that Kirby SFFed Phoenix). Maybe it wasn't you who said that, but the idea that rSFF was a widely accepted thing, particularly in 2005, is definitely not true.

And no I think the result that helps your position is if Samus would have just won outright with >= 52% as the stats indicated. Mario winning with 60% again probably helps Ultis caveman chest beating position.

Anyway yeah this is fairly stupid, but whatever. It's the stats topic. Most discussions in here are pretty stupid. Just lean into it I say. If we were sidetracking a more interesting discussion then sure but it's a couple of rematches. Whatever.
---

No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!