The "it's your fault you lose" fallacy

Competitive Discussion
1 2 3 8 Next
PlayerA: "I can't climb... it's my teammates holding me back"

"It's your fault. You aren't playing well enough to win"

PlayerB: "I can't climb either... it's my teammates holding me back"

"It's YOUR fault. You aren't playing well enough to win"

PlayerB: "But... PlayerA is on my team... didn't you just say it was their fault?"

Okay, so how can it be my fault for losing a match but also my teammate's fault for losing the same match...? It's one or the other. Unless you're saying we're all to blame... in which case, your argument doesn't make sense. You can't look at a match with your own preset notion of who the team is composed of. You can't say "all five of your teammates are good and you're the reason you lost" because then you have to say that same thing to any one of those people too.

It's a fallacy, and I'm honestly just tired of people throwing around this reasoning like it's cold hard truth. It's a team game, and any one person only makes up 1/6th of their team. It's totally illogical that it's always that same one person's fault for losing their matches... because there are 5 other people on the team who also lost the match... It has to be their fault sometimes as well... right?
The "logic" behind it is that if you only work to improve yourself to fix the problem that is you, than you will climb to where you should be. Which makes no sense considering it's a team game and to climb you need to win, and to win you need your team to at the very least perform better than the enemy team.
Ive had team mates scream that Reinhardt should never drop his sheild for a second.
So I ran a test
End a control map 0-3.

I have 2 Gold kills as rein from a charge and fire strike.

And our 4 dps all have below 1 k damage is what I had.

Go zenyatta, Lucio , ana.

Have 5 golds.

There are people out there that really are that bad.

Where a high misses 8 hooks
Widows take 6 shots to kill a stationary ana
Genjis and tracers that stand motionless infront of tanks and die
Go a healer for 2 rounds.
Swap to dps for third round
Finish with all golds and a win for that round.

Ive carried teams where I've 1v6 the enemy team on a point and held.

Lost and gained 4 mechs as Dva without dying.

And in over 1 min of game play not a single team mate joined me on the point
3 of them went looking for non existant flankers
2 healers pocketing them and a roadhog trying to snipe .

Sometimes no matter what you do it is never enough.
When you have team mates that never set foot on a point or payload.
Think Tracer and genji is a perfect counter to 4 tank.

Think reaper and junkrat are pharah counters.

Lucky people never see these people on the ladder
On the Aus servers the player pool is incredibly small and you see this class of people all the way from bronze to high plat
The logic is if you improve yourself eventually you will be significantly better than the rest of the players in the match and because if that you will win more games it won't happen overnight it's about patience.
02/27/2017 12:43 AMPosted by Sallian
The logic is if you improve yourself eventually you will be significantly better than the rest of the players in the match and because if that you will win more games it won't happen overnight it's about patience.


But, if it comes down to the individual, then why SR gaining or losing depends on the performance of the team?

All this is full of contradictions of people just trying to justify Blizzard's terrible ranking system.

If one person can carry, then one shouldn't be able to make a team lose right?

This whole thing is so not logic that it hurts to even try to have a discussion about it.
02/26/2017 11:24 PMPosted by Konidias
Okay, so how can it be my fault for losing a match but also my teammate's fault for losing the same match


It's just how team stuff work.
Everyone is a clog in the machine and we all support each other. People drop the ball, someone else picks it up. No one is playing perfect at all times. Also unless someone is doing the Overwatch version of a dive, as in throwing/leaving, most game are in theory winnable. Being as much as people whine about the match maker it's not asking 2k teams to beat 3.4k teams or anything like that unless you live in middle no where and playing at 5am on a Wednesday.

So when you lose, you did not help your team enough in a way that could win the game. They did not help you enough to win the game. The two events are not separate from each other.

Think of it like driving. We don't get into accidents every single time we drive being everyone is playing their role. Some times you get bad drivers or a person is having an off day. Many times a good driver is 100% the only reason there is no accident. Yet even even the best drivers screw up and have been a bailed out by someone else's good driving.

That's the system... Overwatch is the same way.
It's a cop out to just blame your team all the time. Plus as people keep trying to point out, the bulk of lower rank players have serious gaps in their player skill set. Yet if you even try to mention that no on wants to hear it.
Statistics work over time, so isolated events such as throws or people playing to the best of their abilities has to be considered as just that; isolated events. I like the "cog in a machine"-metaphor above, and it is accurate. One cog can easily ruin it for everyone else. Statistically, as in statistics, where single-game logic doesnt count, you will improve your rank if you play better. Over time. That is inevitable.
02/26/2017 11:24 PMPosted by Konidias
PlayerA: "I can't climb... it's my teammates holding me back"

"It's your fault. You aren't playing well enough to win"

PlayerB: "I can't climb either... it's my teammates holding me back"

"It's YOUR fault. You aren't playing well enough to win"

PlayerB: "But... PlayerA is on my team... didn't you just say it was their fault?"

Okay, so how can it be my fault for losing a match but also my teammate's fault for losing the same match...? It's one or the other. Unless you're saying we're all to blame... in which case, your argument doesn't make sense. You can't look at a match with your own preset notion of who the team is composed of. You can't say "all five of your teammates are good and you're the reason you lost" because then you have to say that same thing to any one of those people too.

It's a fallacy, and I'm honestly just tired of people throwing around this reasoning like it's cold hard truth. It's a team game, and any one person only makes up 1/6th of their team. It's totally illogical that it's always that same one person's fault for losing their matches... because there are 5 other people on the team who also lost the match... It has to be their fault sometimes as well... right?


Your fallacy argument is inaccurate. Both question and answer to player A and B are both independent of each other and also the third question.

The third question is "whose fault is it that we lost THE match". Obviously the answer might be neither player A or player B or it might be both. Either way, it's irrelevant to the answers in the original questions.

The answer to "why I can't climb" can be true for both player a and b. If the question was "why we can't climb if player A always plays with player B" then the answer is that they are collectively not good enough.

You are taking the premise that not all games are winnable and therefore it is not possible to climb. While the premise is true, the conclusion is not. The correct conclusion should be: not all games are winnable, thus it is harder to climb.
You have to be good enough to climb.

If you are not climbing you are where you are supposed to be.

It is such a simple thing why don't you guys just get it?
I love how the so-called "fallacy" only ever equates to your teammates, never anyone on the enemy team.

It's always: "Oh look, I'm better than everyone on my team, we still lose because I can't carry them, and so I can't climb SR."

But it's never: "Oh the enemy teams beat me, yet they're the same SR as me."

So why is that? Shouldn't logic dictate that better players climb the ladder, bad players fall down the ladder, and people who don't improve to stagnate or stay the same.

In that case, if you think you're better than your rank, shouldn't you be better than the enemy team's players too? After all, they're in the same rank tier, playing in the same game with you right? If the enemy team was all superior to your own teammates, shouldn't they be at a higher rank? So it's fair that you should have better SR because your team is bad, but the enemy team that actually beat you (proving they are better), to be in that tier?

But in your heads, "logic" is always warped to revolve around only yourself, due to the selfish and immature mentality that is prevalent -- only I get the bad teammates, only I'm being trolled, only I am unlucky, only ME ME ME ME! Even if calmer heads tell you to ignore those "supposed" baddies and to focus on yourself if you want to climb, you take that to mean that baddies can't exist and that you have to win 1v6. Never seeing by what they mean that in the long run, if others are truly bad, they will drop or stagnate, and if you are truly better, you will climb.

If you focus on your role, and execute your roles perfectly... flawlessly, your team will always have an advantage. And I can guarantee you that none of you play your roles perfectly or even anywhere close to it; I've seen your ranks play and you're all just as clueless as each other that you so like to blame. But yet, somehow you should be higher, while the baddies that always lose seem to forever be in the same tier as you still, and the enemy team players that seem to beat you so easily game after game are also somehow in the same tier as you. So yea keep bleating about "logic" when your logic is about as warped as your selfish motives -- until you change that terrible mental attitude, you will forever stagnate where you belong.
People say "it's your fault that you loss" because they look at your rank and immediately assume that just because a DPS main GM could solo carry in your rank with a smurf, you can do it too.

The problem here is thinking that anyone facing Elo hell or being stuck in their rank, can suddenly play DPS, get tons of solo kills and solo carry his team.

So you could have the skills similar to a gold player yet be stuck in silver because the difference in your skills with other silver players in your game is not significant enough to make up for every single mistake your team makes.
02/27/2017 01:43 AMPosted by Fershizzy
02/26/2017 11:24 PMPosted by Konidias
PlayerA: "I can't climb... it's my teammates holding me back"

"It's your fault. You aren't playing well enough to win"

PlayerB: "I can't climb either... it's my teammates holding me back"

"It's YOUR fault. You aren't playing well enough to win"

PlayerB: "But... PlayerA is on my team... didn't you just say it was their fault?"

Okay, so how can it be my fault for losing a match but also my teammate's fault for losing the same match...? It's one or the other. Unless you're saying we're all to blame... in which case, your argument doesn't make sense. You can't look at a match with your own preset notion of who the team is composed of. You can't say "all five of your teammates are good and you're the reason you lost" because then you have to say that same thing to any one of those people too.

It's a fallacy, and I'm honestly just tired of people throwing around this reasoning like it's cold hard truth. It's a team game, and any one person only makes up 1/6th of their team. It's totally illogical that it's always that same one person's fault for losing their matches... because there are 5 other people on the team who also lost the match... It has to be their fault sometimes as well... right?


Your fallacy argument is inaccurate. Both question and answer to player A and B are both independent of each other and also the third question.

The third question is "whose fault is it that we lost THE match". Obviously the answer might be neither player A or player B or it might be both. Either way, it's irrelevant to the answers in the original questions.

The answer to "why I can't climb" can be true for both player a and b. If the question was "why we can't climb if player A always plays with player B" then the answer is that they are collectively not good enough.

You are taking the premise that not all games are winnable and therefore it is not possible to climb. While the premise is true, the conclusion is not. The correct conclusion should be: not all games are winnable, thus it is harder to climb.


But, but... according to the git gud guys, all games are winnable and you only lose because you are bad while not all games are winnable even if you are not bad, as the matchmaking will (try to) make it so.
[quote="207515627978"]
But, but... according to the git gud guys, all games are winnable and you only lose because you are bad while not all games are winnable even if you are not bad, as the matchmaking will (try to) make it so.


All games are, in fact, winnable, as all games are loseable(?). Don't, however, underestimate team mechanics, and don't overestimate individual performance.
02/27/2017 01:26 AMPosted by Lokthey
02/27/2017 12:43 AMPosted by Sallian
The logic is if you improve yourself eventually you will be significantly better than the rest of the players in the match and because if that you will win more games it won't happen overnight it's about patience.


But, if it comes down to the individual, then why SR gaining or losing depends on the performance of the team?

All this is full of contradictions of people just trying to justify Blizzard's terrible ranking system.

If one person can carry, then one shouldn't be able to make a team lose right?

This whole thing is so not logic that it hurts to even try to have a discussion about it.


Wut?! But that would make too much sense?! Wait you performed better than the average person in YOUR rank and was top performer on YOUR team!!! Why can't you climb?! Oh wait I forgot those 3-5 other retards that don't know how to hard counter d ic ked you in the eternal ELO Hell. It does exist and it makes this amazing game lack in progression
You are missing the point. Taking it like it's your fault is and should be an incredibly empowering statement. The exact opposite of how you take it.

Blaming your team mates, whether it's right or wrong, will lead you exactly no where. Or maybe might even tilt you and make you lose faster.

The only positive and constructive approach is "what can I do about myself".

Now maybe you are playing very well, and they are not. Have you thought of giving your team mate tips?
Now your tips are always badly received, have you thought of way to improve your communication?
Your team mate are !@#$ and take none of your good advice, have you thought of moving on and stop being stop being salty. You last team mate might have been a catastrophe, but your salty state will make the next game a catastrophe because of it!
That's the problem with dealing in absolutes.

For clarity, it should be: not all games are winnable by YOU.

this statement is also true: YOU influence every game you play in.

Now you can read both statements and say, "well, if I can't win every game I play, then it's not my fault and my influence is negligible". That's where the fallacy lies.

Also the idea that you must perform better than the average player of your rank to belong in the next tier is false. To belong in the next tier, you must perform better than the BEST players in your tier.
02/26/2017 11:30 PMPosted by Unfortunate
The "logic" behind it is that if you only work to improve yourself to fix the problem that is you, than you will climb to where you should be. Which makes no sense considering it's a team game and to climb you need to win, and to win you need your team to at the very least perform better than the enemy team.


You're correct, instead of working on the only thing you can actively change (yourself) you should instead sit and complain like a little baby while you somehow keep losing because "my team is bad"

The "logic" behind it is actually that there's only one thing you can reliably see what does wrong and improve on - Yourself. Hence why when you lose, the only constant you could have effectively manipulated is yourself - hence why its your fault.
Oh hello there! Our matchmaking system detected that you won 2 games in a row. Here, have this bot to *balance* things out. Oh and unless you're grandmaster level you won't be able to carry him/her which means you totally deserved to lose that game and your rank! Oh and for some extra *balance*, next game you'll get a leaver. It's YOUR fault again, haven't you got that already?
02/27/2017 01:56 AMPosted by ColostomyBag
In that case, if you think you're better than your rank, shouldn't you be better than the enemy team's players too? After all, they're in the same rank tier, playing in the same game with you right? If the enemy team was all superior to your own teammates, shouldn't they be at a higher rank? So it's fair that you should have better SR because your team is bad, but the enemy team that actually beat you (proving they are better), to be in that tier?

Imagine two pairs of cars, each connected end to end by a chain. The cars try driving away from each other until the chains break. The chains break at the weakest link. In this game the teams are each their own chain, and in 95% of the games I play it comes down to which team has the weakest link to bring them down.

In higher tiers of gameplay carrying the team just means being a bigger help to the team than the average player. In lower tiers of gameplay carrying the team means becoming the team. The difference is vast.

I have lost far too many games, not because the other team was filled with amazing players that deserved to be ranked higher, but we lost just because our team was the dumber team that couldn't do the simplest of tasks.

02/27/2017 01:56 AMPosted by ColostomyBag
Never seeing by what they mean that in the long run, if others are truly bad, they will drop or stagnate, and if you are truly better, you will climb.

I have a big problem with this. This is one reason I hate the system as it stands. My SR gained or lost is reliant on me winning or losing, which in turn is reliant on my team. Those bad players that fall get put on my team, and drag me down with them. First month of the season I climbed up to mid plat, held my own there for a couple weeks, then got stuck with trolls and bad teammates that dragged me down with the ship to low gold, almost silver. It took me up until the end of the season to get back to where I was.

Those bad players falling drag down others (it happens on both sides, either way still a problem), and throw of the rankings even more, just like good players carrying a bunch of bad players up in rank brings some bad players up.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum