There is no elo hell

[quote=recnib]Just stop it... we're playing solo and duo queue, you're going to lose a lot..just stop[/quote]

[quote=JEFFY40HANDS]There is no actual "ELO Hell" However, there are mass numbers of inexperienced players who have little to no idea what they're doing. Which is why I wonder why they don't require players to have an additional number of games before starting ranked (once they hit 30 I mean)....Yes smurfs would suffer, but letting "fresh" 30's jump right into ranked without runes/experience etc. Causes trouble. So while there is no "actual" ELO Hell there is a group of inexperienced players that cause problems for players who have been playing for years now. That's my 2 cents.[/quote]

[quote=Fox Rage][quote=JEFFY40HANDS] There is no actual "ELO Hell" However, there are mass numbers of inexperienced players who have little to no idea what they're doing. Which is why I wonder why they don't require players to have an additional number of games before starting ranked (once they hit 30 I mean)....Yes smurfs would suffer, but letting "fresh" 30's jump right into ranked without runes/experience etc. Causes trouble. So while there is no "actual" ELO Hell there is a group of inexperienced players that cause problems for players who have been playing for years now. That's my 2 cents. [/quote] I always wondred why Riot didn't put a 250-ish wins requirement to play ranked. A LoL beginner will probably have an even w/l ratio, so they'd have played around 500 games, wich is a minimum to be able to play ''decently'' IMO. But yeah, ELO Hell doesn't exist. Do the math.[/quote]

[quote=wRAthoFVuLK]Hey, just praise the LORD it isn't level 20 requirement anymore :P[/quote]

[quote=Darcurse]Not covering for those failures who only seek for excuses... but whoever bluntly says that there's no "Elo Hell" or sth similar already failed to grasp the concept behind "Elo" and why it's a nightmare judging method for anything else except trained FULL-premade teams. Imo what Jeff said is a good way to describe it: You are definitely going to get dragged down a lot.[/quote]

[quote=The Overmyynd]I know for a fact that the lower down in ELO you get the harder it is to climb back up. Especially if you don't know a snowball carry champ like [[akali]]. I'm 4-1 in my placement for season 3, and am nervous as hell to play more in case my good luck runs out and i hit more retards. "elo hell" may not exist, but that's simply because the ELO system for solo/duo q is a terrible way to judge a person, so in a sense, all solo q is ELO hell.[/quote]

[quote=Xeronn]If you're lucky, you will get people that are competent, then you can escape it once you're around 1600+. By that point people are definitely capable.[/quote]

[quote=Le Pro of d00m]Yes, there is no ELO hell, BUT the lower you get the more likely your going to encounter trolls/bad players, im not going to say that i should have a higher elo, but i Could have a higher elo if my teammates were better, Why? BECAUSE ITS A TEAM GAME. I can garentee you 90% of people will blame elo hell, and i doubt all of them got the 10% of people who are bad.[/quote]

[quote=Phil Collins]The term "ELO Hell" was created by another one of those scrubs who think they're better than the rest of their team. I was 800 ELO in season 1 but I climbed to 1600 in season 2. It's not possible to be unable to carry yourself. If you're stuck in that ELO range for at least a month, then you belong there.[/quote]

[quote=wRAthoFVuLK]^nah. It could take longer than a month. But the general concept, yea. @Le Pro and Xeron, you are so fucking wrong if you think past a certain Elo you will get less trolls. I was at 1100-1200 season 1, and got more competent and less trolly teammates than I did at 1700. And at 2ks and 2.2k+ you get a shitload of trolls who don't even give a fuck. Hence my earlier post, every Elo is Elo hell :P[/quote]