You sound like a ****ing english major. "Yeah but he has feelings about the matchups man" .If you are going to contest my conclusions then run the experiments and disprove it. You should step up and pay for gerson to come here just to prove me wrong.
Or I can go back and look at the stock data. 50-55 lives feel good enough for you?
EDIT: I just rememberd that Isai and Gerson went pika dittos in the Isai vs Tacna and Gerson won. That puts Isai with 6/11 with pika and 7/11 with fox. What a coincidence.
Lord, someone doesn't know how the world works.
That's bad math. You can't just run numbers and assume that it gives you the unvarnished truth. What you're doing is the equivalent of watching the cardinals lose a set to the cubs and win a set against the red sox, and then saying that you knew for a fact that the cardinals are better against the red sox than the cubs. Try telling that to an oddsmaker sometime, and then berate
them for being wishy-washy about numbers after they laugh your ass out of the building. In that situation, listening to the cardinals' manager about their relative chances would be a better thing to base a bet on.
If it makes you feel better, change it to 7/11 and 6/10. The logic above holds. Even if the scores were skewed towards the cubs.
And assuming that stock count is necessarily and unproblematically correlated with win percentage is a headache of its own. Not to mention that they played the characters in chunks, meaning that Isai or gerson might have been tired, unwarmed up, etc. during either "set," or that (more likely) one of the players learned the other's playstyle as time went on.
Look, you might be right. It could even be probable that you're right; maybe the numbers mean a lot. But to say that you have mathematically proven your correctness to the point where you can make unqualified statements about isai's matchups for him is terrible, awful math. Take an econ class or something.