I don't want to debate the logs any longer, but I think I should address this.Heysup: I think your post analyzing the logs falls short. You can't just look at turns you consider critical and analyze just the odds of one thing happening that turn. Consider the case of Magneton with HP Fire vs. Registeel with Rest (a match that I remember having quite well in a Gen 3 battle):
This particular Registeel had enough HP and Special Defense such that Magneton had a 4HKO, which meant that the battle went something like this:
Magneton used Thunderbolt! (35% damage)
Registeel is fast asleep!
Registeel has 71.25% health remaining.
Magneton used Thunderbolt! (35% damage)
Registeel is fast asleep!
Registeel has 42.5% health remaining.
Magneton used Thunderbolt! (35% damage)
Registeel woke up! Registeel used Rest!
Registeel has 100% health remaining.
What this means is that unless Magneton gets a CH, it will eventually run out of PP and lose to Registeel. However, a single CH at any point leads to Magneton winning. That is 48 chances for a critical hit, assuming Magneton starts out at full PP. If you look at a single turn in the battle and see a CH, that's obviously bullshit hax! The odds of a CH on a single turn is 6.25%. The odds of a CH on any of those turns is 95.49% So when you consider the battle as a whole, then it's actually luckier not to get the CH.
On the one turn in which it mattered, he got crit. He had the game won barring that one crit on that one turn. The fact that there were no crits up to that point does not have any affect on this one attack (as I'm sure you didn't mean to imply, but just to clarify my point).
If you take a group of those attacks doing 35%, of course it's likely that there will be a crit in 48 attacks. However, this example isn't analogous to Earthworm's battle (or any battle with a BP team). This is because if you group the attacks up, Piro could have critted almost any other time and it wouldn't have mattered because of Substitutes. Earthworm didn't get the substitute up because of a couple misplays, and he still had it statistically won.
Nothing besides the barely used ladder stopping people....Nothing's stopping people from playing ADV to see what BP is like. We shouldn't use a suspect test just to bring people to the metagame. That would be morally questionable even if our suspect tests haven't shown a bias towards banning.
I'm not a big fan of the suspect test idea, but I do think it's far better than the alternative, if it's the only alternative, of waiting until the first round of the tour. I'd rather deal with it now.
I'm not dismissing the logs, actually. They prove BP is actually more broken than Pirotechnix originally thought even with an anti-BP team he still (EDIT: forgot to / instead of -)lost 1/3 and haxed at least one of the other two (crit on MM in ew's).jrrrrrr said:You're the only one dismissing logs...I see a handful of posts doing a good and fair job of analyzing those logs.
I mostly agree with Synre's post, which, just because you didn't respond to doesn't mean it's not there. Instead of responding to this, respond to him.
EDIT: @ Pirotechnix, I guess I misunderstood your other post, it seemed as if you changed your opinion. With Baton Pass you know the right move, you don't have to predict the right move.