Why is Gold considered high ELO?

[quote=Vynertje]I was 950 elo in early S2, now I'm 2100 (comparable to bronze 3 - plat 2)[/quote]

[quote=tehAsian]I dont think Gold is high at all. Mid Elo feels more appropriate. Yesterday I've played on my friend's Gold 1 account, MMR about Gold 2-1, and the overall lack of knowledge for players in the top 10% was disturbing.[/quote]

[quote=RaNuD]As I stated previously today, gold fits well my conception of "high" quantile. Then, AGAIN, you dont need to be especially aware of any subtle game mechanic to get there, which means I do agree it doesnt mean you are anywhere near competitive play when you reach gold. Still, after doing some pretty basic maths, how can anyone state 12% of the population isnt "high ELO", or even "high-ish ELO"? It just doesnt fit any reasonable standard I know.[/quote]

[quote=regatto][quote=Vapora Dark] [quote]welp tbh i think the arguments here are kinda poor. its as if something's either low or high ELO. most differentiate well enough in terms of mechanical skill and game knowledge but i dont think its enough. id simply consider bronze/silver/bottom gold low ELO, high-mid gold and plat mid ELO and everything after that high ELO.[/quote] Okay, how about you look at it this way? Low elo: Bronze, Silver Mid elo: Gold High elo: Plat, Diamond Obviously challenger is high elo too, but I don't treat it as a proper tier because only 50 people are in it at any one time. So leaving aside challenger, there's 5 tiers. The 2 lower ones are the low tiers, the one in the middle is the middle tier, and the 2 higher ones are the high tiers. Gold should get to be in the high elo section despite not being high elo, because guides by gold players are almost always better than silver / bronze guides, and you need to be reasonably good to actually get gold anyway, as opposed to bronze / silver which are really absolutely no challenge at all. Even bronze level players just need to get lucky enough in their placement matches to get placed in silver, and they're silver for the rest of the season, provided they don't let themselves be Elo decayed. But it would be very very very very very hard for anyone to get into gold by pure luck if they weren't at least at a silver 1 level. [/quote] yeah but, even though its about guide tagginng, i dont think you can consider a gold player better just because his guides are better, and the difference between how unranked/bronze/silver players look at a gold ranked player vs a plat ranked one is very big; platinum players get way more credibility because the climb is harder and platinum > gold outright (gold1 > plat5 is considered one of the toughest climbs for people that are plat+ in my experience and that of others i know).[/quote]