Why do Some Argue Against Skill Based MM?

Death_on_2_Treads, on Apr 11 2021 - 10:57, said:   Sure it is feasible. Not to you, or the other defenders of the WOT faith that show up in every post decrying any attempt to even the playing field.    Data?  That's funny. Sure, I'll address just like all other data is addressed on here that your group disagrees with. The data is insufficient, the sample size is to small, you have only cherry picked the data that fits the point you want to make, or you're not a statistician so you don't understand the data your are posting. I've probably forgotten a few of the standard responses given when ever anyone is pro SBMM and presents data, so forgive me. The "facts" are that the current MM system can be improved to make matches more fair. How it happens is another discussion, but it can happen. To me, it seems that  MOST blowouts have a common theme, uneven skill.    If this were one on one for example, and you are the best player at this game, you should not be put in a match with the worst player in this game. I can tell you how that ends 99% of the time, maybe even 100%. That's not fun for either player I'm going to guess. Now extrapolate that to two teams of 15 players. If the 15 best players are on one team, and the 15 worst players on the other, I can also tell you how that ends and how much fun it isn't also. Now lets put two teams of 15, made up of the evenly divided top 30 players in the game. I can tell you that it isn't far off from 50/50. Any match that starts out fair, or even, will then be determined by the actions  of the players in that match, not because one team starts out with huge skill advantage. It is impossible to make every match perfect in skill and tank tier, and tank type, but the current system can be improved to reduce the number of matches that aren't competitive. Again, I get why the majority of people who don't support SBMM are better players. They don't want to face each other. They don't want it to be fair. They like random.