Why do Some Argue Against Skill Based MM?

DeviouslyCursed:  This is why I think you are a moron. You have no idea how to draw a reasonable conclusion from data. You literally just said: If the battle is balanced a blowout is due to snowball affect, BUT if the match is not balanced the blowout is automatically due to mismatch in skill. Except there are roughly 24 out of 100 blowouts when teams are even, and 27 out of 100 when teams are severely uneven. Anyone not a moron would conclude that at best, 3 out of 100 blowouts are due to skill mismatch. How do I know this? 27 - 24 = 3. That's the difference skill disparity makes in blowout matches. That's it. That's the difference. Therefore that is the amount of blowouts caused by a wide degree of skill difference. Three out of 100. I will also add, that data did not show how many times the less skilled team that was supposed to lose actually won by blowout. When I had xvm, I saw it happen. In fact, if a lower skilled team is going to win, that's the most likely route to victory: a quick lead followed by a solid push to overwhelm the rest. The longer a match goes on, the more likely the more skilled players will come back to win. Those were the worst losses... when your team had 70%+ chance to win but got rolled so hard it was over in less than 5 minutes. And no, it wasn't rigged. I could tell by the way they deployed we were in trouble.  You know those matches where the enemy team seems to outnumber your team on every front? How? It's 15 v 15. But they have all their guns in the fight, and you team is hobnobbing all over the place. Starts off with a 1 v 3 on one flank, and a 2 v 5 on the other, and suddenly your team is down 3 tanks and their team is grouped and pushing. GG.