How can anyone see that the team that gets first tower wins in 75% of games and think that's okay?

Yenn·Mar 6, 2018·47 votes·2,546 views

In 6/10 games at Diamond, a single mistake made by the bottom lane costs the tower and snowballs the game out of control. In another 3/10 games, bottom lane is auto-filled and just gets stomped from start to finish.

The game can be completely even until that happens, and then it just degrades into a slow rolling snowball to the end of the game. There's no way to defend against a team pushing you down with a full item advantage. Even as something like Ziggs, you can only prolong the game, without any chance to recover the gold difference.

What the fuck is up with this?

69 Comments

Sp33d Zer0Mar 6, 201834 votes

"I want to be able to solo carry my games"

"Getting an early lead shouldn't lead to you winning"

Pick one

Milton FletcherMar 6, 20189 votes

How did u manage to post that without feeling that it might not make any sense at all?

Getting an early lead has nothing to do with good players solo carrying .

I shouldn’t have to rely on my adc not suiciding 40 minutes in on her own with zero vision for me to win a game.

Sp33d Zer0Mar 6, 201817 votes

Getting an early lead and punishing is THE way to solo carry. You do this by capitalizing on bad play from the enemy.

You get first tower by capitalizing on either the enemies poor back timing or making them so weak they cannot fight you and have to give up tower.

Both of these are cases where you punish the enemy for being worse than you. Explain how they aren't related.

At 40 minutes nothing is solo.

Milton FletcherMar 6, 20185 votes

Say i didn’t get an early lead becuase the enemy top is a bitchmade player who rushed tabis and glacial shroud into thornmail on malphite top

If I’m able to rotate and make good calls, I should be able to solo carry then.

If I’m able to get fed off farm and roams and ganks, I should be able to solo carry.

http://prntscr.com/incgvo

This is literally proof that once again I SHOULD BE ABLE TO SOLO CARRY

Sp33d Zer0Mar 6, 20184 votes

If you are rotating you're working with your team.

If you are ganking other lanes and setting them up for plays and snowball you are working with your team.

If you are grouping for objectives you are playing with your team.

Milton FletcherMar 6, 20181 votes

As a top laner with tp it’s usual to split and push lanes solo.

Maybe u don’t know about this but ur not always grouped as a top laners

Look at the link and tell me I deserved to lose.

Not only did I have most damage cs and gold but I was playing it perfectly but becuase I’m one man and these are 4 bad players, it was not possible .

Sp33d Zer0Mar 6, 20187 votes

You played perfectly*, aside from the fact that this screen tells me nothing other than your final score. I mean, if you wanna go off KDA, Varus, Volibear, and Syndra all deserved it way more than you did.

*Ignoring that you died 3 times. Meaning 3 times you made mistakes where you weren't able to put up pressure for you team or you got caught.

Milton FletcherMar 6, 20183 votes

I died once to a gank top where I was dove.

I died once mid game when I had to flash engage for my team which got us baron after I caught out the Varus

Last death was when they were about to end the game and we had to 5v5 meaning it was 5 man pile on the riven since she’s the only one worth a damn.

Ur so fucking clueless on how games work that u actually think 3 deaths are a good reason as to why I deserve to lose.

As for the damage charts, I had most damage to!! What’s ur excuse then?

Sp33d Zer0Mar 6, 20184 votes

Post the replay.

Post the actual in game stat page with via your matchmaking (ex: https://matchhistory.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/#match-details/NA1/2732169021/45096153?tab=overview)

Either put up or shut up. I guarentee that if you watched your game again you could pick it apart and find ways to play better.

TehNACHOMar 7, 20181 votes

This is gold.

He's saying all this good shit and the moment you call for evidence which would prove his argument, he shuts up.

The Yetii RiderMar 6, 20181 votes

This is absolutely correct. Mid and top lane will simply never be able to match the power of a late game marksman (if they could, that would be broken based on their power in the early and mid game, which is why early game marksmen are constantly either getting nerfed or pushed to build lethality, which scales horribly into the late game).

If you want to solo carry, fine. But you need to win the game before 30 minutes if you hope to do that, unless you are a broken champion in sore need of a rework, like Irelia, Akali or Ryze. Most BALANCED champions cannot solo carry, even champions like Riven and Vayne are often simply too hard to play. Even the best Riven and Vayne players make tiny micro mistakes in the heat of the moment that costs them a Pentakill.

Snowballing power like first tower blood and Rift Herald allow for you to win the game early off an early lead. I have, legitimately, taken the third top tower at 12 minutes by killing Rift Herald at 10, ganking top and getting an easy kill, and just keeping Rift Herald alive and diving the enemy jungler under 2nd tower, then killing the enemy top laner between 2nd and 3rd. We used our numbers advantage and our superior playing to simply kill the enemy team as they tried to stop us, and the mid and bot didn't base to help their team because they're still in "laning phase" mode.

We didn't manage to get inhib, but that immense pressure from getting 3 turrets in two minutes gave us an easy 23 minute victory (mid third turret by 17 into two inhibs and then baron at 20).

That is an example of how I, as a jungler, am capable of solo carrying my games. I do not need to get a level 3 gank to win the game with sheer map pressure, I'm very aware of how powerful Rift Herald is.

Sp33d Zer0Mar 6, 20181 votes

I disagree that they will never be able to match the power of late game marksman. Champions like Cassiopeia Gangplank Jax Karthus Kassadin Kayle Nasus Rumble Ryze are just a few examples of champions who are just as potent in the very late game.

The Yetii RiderMar 6, 20181 votes

Of those champions, only Karthus, Ryze, GP, Nasus and Jax can really solo carry. Maybe Kayle, but that should be made much more difficult with the planned nerfing of item 3124 . Kassadin's damage output is way too slow for him to reasonably mop up a team without dying. Cassie's range limitations make her very easy to kill or flank. Rumble has almost no defensive abilities and he's not a tank.

Sennamain RoleMar 7, 20181 votes

I think "Getting an early lead shouldn't lead to you winning" should be replaced by "One player shouldn't be able to throw the game for the whole team." Not in a trolling sense, because realistically, there is no way to mitigate trolling other than removing them from games. However, when a top-laner or mid-laner, or even a jungler feeds a lane so hard that there is no reasonable way to come back, that really irritates the other 4 teammates. This change to the wording does allow both statements to coexist, or at least makes it more reasonable.

People(Team A) are generally content with a single enemy(Team B) that gets a lead off of their counterpart, and then proceeds to expand that lead by impacting the rest of the map. In this scenario, the Team B player made good, team-oriented decisions that caused them to win, and gave Team A plenty of opportunities to challenge them. If they fail to stop the fed player in this context, then they deserve to lose.

Conversely, Team A is not happy when a person on Team B stays in their lane and murders their opponent repeatedly until they finally leave and no one can touch them. If an opponent leaves laning phase with 6 solo kills and up 40-50 cs as a carrying champion, it is very difficult to stop them. When this happens, there are very few opportunities for Team A to oppose the single fed Team B player without putting themselves further behind.

While this probably does not happen all that often, it is still annoying for many players. It might just be a problem of semantics, but I think this is an important question: did the Team B player really solo carry, or did the Team A player solo throw? Ultimately this is a team game, so it is fair to discuss how much impact each player should have, which leads us to another, more important set of questions: should one player be able to negatively impact one team's chances of winning as hard as another can positively impact the other team's chances of winning, and is it possible to change one aspect independent of the other?

Lil Homie bustaMar 7, 20181 votes

That would sound fair-

If bot lane turret had Fortification. So the only lane that have a easy time gaining early lead is bot lane; therefore, solo laners cannot take advantage from it as much as bot lane.

TehNACHOMar 6, 201818 votes

I recall seeing a statistic from a Balance Team member that when they introduced the First (Tower) Blood mechanic, teams that won after getting First Blood went up by a whopping...4% or something.

It's always been the case that the team who can secure an early advantage are more likely to win. And this makes sense too, what point is there in early game plays if getting first tower led to only a 50% winrate? The premise that those who get first tower winning more is unacceptable is rather silly.

YennMar 6, 201813 votes

{quoted}

I recall seeing a statistic from a Balance Team member that when they introduced the First (Tower) Blood mechanic, teams that won after getting First Blood went up by a whopping...4% or something.

It's always been the case that the team who can secure an early advantage are more likely to win. And this makes sense too, what point is there in early game plays if getting first tower led to only a 50% winrate? The premise that those who get first tower winning more is unacceptable is rather silly.

Except first tower often happens around 8 minutes, due to a singular mistake, often by one player. A single player making one mistake at 8 minutes should not start an unstoppable snowball.

This is also only true if the mistake is made at bottom lane. Top lane players can and often do play like monkeys and constantly make mistakes, but they don't snowball the game out of control. The same applies to middle. Bottom lane has too much impact over the game.

TehNACHOMar 6, 201818 votes

And? You're using Diamond players in your example, who at that point I expect should be able to capitalize on fatal errors.

It's not Bronze, when people make mistakes they get punished. The premise is, once again, silly if you think otherwise.

LankPantsMar 6, 20183 votes

You think a single mistake should be a "fatal error", that's the problem with the game at the moment.

Starcraft243verMar 6, 20184 votes

The higher you rank the more punishing your opponents are.

LankPantsMar 6, 20184 votes

The simple fact is that mistakes are too punishing at high ranks right now. The optimal way to play is to never even try to do anything because risk to reward in league is just abysmal.

Z3SleeperMar 6, 20181 votes

Nothing to do with bot tower first blood but rather the fact it usually comes with 2 kills/assists gold and xp for the enemy ADC.

Sp33d Zer0Mar 6, 20181 votes

And a dragon you can rotate off of.

Sire HippingtonMar 6, 20182 votes

There is a difference from above 50% and 75% it's fine that teams that get first tower win more often, but it shouldn't be in such a big scale given that the outer towers are rather minor onjectives. even a 55% would actually be a meaningfull enough advantage.

Also, tower FB might not have made that big of a difference(though 4% is big enough), but combined with the preseason 6 towergold changes and most off all the vision changed there is a big difference compared to befor. Towers are not just for gold, there main purpose is map and vision controll. With how little vision we have from items, aditional sources like towers and minon waves become more imortant so takeing tower not only in terms of gold, but also in terms of mapcontroll is more snowbally that befor S6. Throw in the overall increased snowballiness off the game and there is a rather big difference for takeing first tower now compared to S5 or earlier.

LeetriMar 6, 20184 votes

Think of it like this instead. They're not winning because they got the first tower, they got the first tower because they're the better team. Sometimes the worse team got the first tower (the better team might have a weak early but really strong late, for example) and sometimes it's really even, but the late-game decided who won. Basically, what I'm saying is that there's no use trying to use that statistic to prove anything because it's missing 99% of the context. We only know that people who win games tend to get first tower more often than not.

Sire HippingtonMar 6, 20182 votes

Sure, data is not all that usefull without context, but it's also not complete void if it has enough samplesize. Wether teams get a lead because of first tower or wether they get first tower because they have a lead doesn't matter, in the end both hints at teams with an early lead usually beeing able to win the game. So regardless of context, an as high winrate as 75% for first tower is a clear sing for strong snowballing, it just doesn't give away wether the direct rewards for takeing a tower are a decideing factor in that. It's a symptom that shows that there is an issue somewhere, but it doesn't really bring you to the core of it without context. Just how fever usually indicates that you probably are ill, but without further context you won't get a diagnose for what exactly is wrong.

RewtMar 6, 201812 votes

In most cases if a team gets first tower in diamond that team is playing more coordinated. Which means they will win. Its probably got less to do with the first tower itsself and more to do with what is the team with the first tower gold doing to get that lead.

Are they just 4 man diving towers and taking them really quickly? are they just hard pushing and grouping at 8min? Cause this happens. And it causes teams to win.

There is a reason that stat is from diamond and not silver. If someone gets first tower in silver its probably because the laner lost his lane solo and over the course of 15 min lost his tower. In Diamond its most likely 6-8min in they 4 manned a tower and killed it.

Vastly different reasons with vastly different repercussions.

Milton FletcherMar 6, 20184 votes

Lol?

U mean when I get dove as a top laner by the jungler and top at 10 minutes becuase their top is a tank and I can’t do shit to dives, it was because they were coordinated rather than towers being too weak?

Z3SleeperMar 6, 20187 votes

Yes. Honestly yes. I've been on the bad end of that stick several times and while it feels like bullshit I can always look back and see what mistakes I made for them to be able to do that.

Tower-diving pre-6 with only 2 people is risky, no matter who's doing it. The problem comes when the risk is eliminated and that mainly falls on the player for several factors.

Post-6 it's the top laner's fault for sticking around to get dove if they knew they couldn't handle it. If they had wards and they knew the enemy jg was coming and they knew they couldn't take both the laner and jg under tower, then they should have left and hoped that their team could make use of the 4v3 pressure to do dragon or take a turret (or hope the jg is close enough to counter the dive).

Towers are not completely safe havens and should not be.

Automated RivenMar 6, 20182 votes

{quoted}

In most cases if a team gets first tower in diamond that team is playing more coordinated. Which means they will win. Its probably got less to do with the first tower itsself and more to do with what is the team with the first tower gold doing to get that lead.

Are they just 4 man diving towers and taking them really quickly? are they just hard pushing and grouping at 8min? Cause this happens. And it causes teams to win.

There is a reason that stat is from diamond and not silver. If someone gets first tower in silver its probably because the laner lost his lane solo and over the course of 15 min lost his tower. In Diamond its most likely 6-8min in they 4 manned a tower and killed it.

Vastly different reasons with vastly different repercussions.

I play in silver. There is no way first brick is still up at 15 minutes.

xelakerMar 6, 20183 votes

guys, the point isn't that advantages shouldn't lead to more wins, it's that 1 mistake shouldn't drop your ability to win by 25% within the first 8ish minutes. a big increase in victory chance should be determined by a skilled play, not "welp I lost 80% of my health in a single trade, better base so I can lose my turret"

LeetriMar 6, 20181 votes

"It is possible to commit no mistakes and still lose. That is not a weakness; that is life." - Jean Luc Picard Your entire team could play absolutely perfectly and not make a single mistake and still lose because the opponent simply played better. People never want to accept it, but some games are lost simply because your opponents are better than you. You could be of the exact same MMR, but they're on their way to Challenger while you've stagnated.

xelakerMar 7, 20181 votes

this is league of legends not life. if your team plays a perfect game you will win...

LeetriMar 7, 20181 votes

Your opponents can still play better. Playing perfectly doesn't mean you automatically gain Challenger skills, it simply means that you didn't make any mistakes.

3TWarriorMar 7, 20181 votes

you're also quoting the person who is famous at the academy for cheating a psychological evaluation test by hacking the computer to make an intentional impossible scenario possible to overcome

cheese tactics that can lead to opponents being "better than you" were very rare in earlier seasons because it was game over to leave lane and give opponents a CS advantage except with very few champions

ValyrianBladeMar 6, 20183 votes

Each team has a 50% chance at winning, however that doesn't include a lot of factors: MMR inaccuracy, tilt, champion selection, team comp, and simply how well someone is playing that day.

Get that all out of the way, and you're probably not that close to 50%.

Saying that the team who is winning early will eventually win the game 75% of the time isn't unreasonable... I mean, let's break it down (completely made up): Let's say 40% of games are really close throughout, 40% are stomps, and 20% are attempted comebacks with a better scaling team.

Of the first 40%, the team with first tower gets a bit of an advantage and wins say 60% of the time (a reasonable reward for good early play). That results in a 24-16 splits on the group.

Of the next 40% the games are stomps with basically 100% won after first tower. These are games where a team simply picked a better comp, played better throughout, or otherwise dominated (maybe someone fed hard, etc...).

Of the final 20%, the first tower doesn't mean hardly anything, give them a 50% chance at winning. The late game comp makes up the gold disadvantage (if the late game comp were better players, they'd be winning in the stomp group).

Then your total would end up at 74% to 26%.

So I'm not really concerned about that.

Give me a stat that says one tower falls but the game is pretty close overall (either another tower is taken in response shortly after, or the other team is within 300g after the tower) and the win rate is still over 65%, then we can see a problem.

Saying that a good number of games the team is already winning hard and first tower is just a necessary step to victory doesn't mean much.

ModKnightsKemplarMar 6, 20182 votes

I don't actually see how it's that big of a problem.

That means even after you're behind, there's still a 25% chance you can turn it around. That's maybe a little skewed to snowball, but really not bad. What do you think the % should be?

50%, of course, would be mean there's not even a point in trying to get first tower.

Awf MetaMar 6, 20182 votes

50%, of course, would be mean there's not even a point in trying to get first tower.

I thought the point of first tower gold was to discourage LCS from lane swap tower trades. I could easily be wrong.

What does Riot say? Is first tower gold meant as a snowball encouragement?

ModKnightsKemplarMar 6, 20183 votes

I mean, it may have surfaced as an LCS discouragement, but we're all playing the same game.

You have to consider that the team that is already winning is more likely to take first tower. If the number was 40%, that would mean that being ahead early is actually bad.

Even if there were no extra reward at all for getting first tower, the number would still be more than 50%, because again, the team that's already ahead is more likely to get first tower. I realize there is some resistance to snowball as a core concept, but if being ahead doesn't make you more likely to win, then there's no point in playing at all. Might as well pick champs and flip a coin.

Awf MetaMar 6, 20182 votes

"Is winning/ahead" is not the same as "expected to win".

There is an idea that there are "early" and "late" game champions.

Early game champions are relatively strong early in the game and become relatively weaker the longer the game lasts.

Late game champions are relatively weak early in the game and become relatively stronger the longer the game lasts.

We would expect early game champions to secure first tower more often than late game champions. This does not mean we expect early game champions to win more often than late game champions.

It is only when the snowball mechanics become overpowering that we expect the early game champions to beat the late game champions.

Without the overpowering snowball mechanics, we expect the win condition depends on time. The early game champions should try to win as fast as possible. The late game champions should try to stall for as long as possible.

ModKnightsKemplarMar 6, 20181 votes

I agree, but I still think it shouldn't be 50%. Then, there isn't a reason to pick early game champs anymore; if being ahead early doesn't make you more likely to win, then early game champs aren't worth much. In that scenario, you should just pick late game champs and stall as much as possible.

HaIlMonitorMar 7, 20181 votes

That is basically how the game is in pro play right now. Not sure if you fallowed TSM but they lost I want to say 3 games where they had 10k leads. It didnt seem like they did anything to "throw the game". Just the enemy team held on by the skin of their teeth then the early-mid champs TSM drafted couldn't do anything about the Mid-Lategame draft of the enemy team.

Also in soloque, that still is a problem. Sense the Lucian nerfs that got him out of bot lane the only lane bully that we see once in a while is MF , who isnt that great right now, but the top ADC's with 50%+ winrate are all scaling champs. That is because if they somehow get a small lead they blow the enemy team out because 1 for 1 their gold is "worth more". Then the tower change that make bot tower the easiest to kill make the game very much bot oriented.

I personally thing if they want it to be a team game then things like First tower, first blood, and RNG dragon spawns shouldn't effect the game as much as they do. if I ha to give a % I would say around 53%, because nothing sucks worst then a team getting the FB tower in bot, FB in top, then just sit there doing the 1, 3, 1, push the rest of the game until you just flat out lose. So much for "team play" with they all just sit in normal lanes all game lol.

ModKnightsKemplarMar 7, 20181 votes

53% would not even nearly account for the team that got those objectives just being better.

And this is why I brought that up to begin with; I think we can all probably agree that there should be a back and forth, yada yada yada. But personally, I don't think people are considering the numbers properly. Reality is that teams are rarely actually evenly matched in most elos.

I see what you're saying. You don't think that a first tower blood should account for more than 3% of those wins. I could get behind that. But what I'm saying is that for it only to account for 3% of those wins, the number needs to actually look a lot higher, because it isn't a deciding factor in most games. Most games getting that first tower blood is just an inevitable step on the better team's road to victory.

HaIlMonitorMar 7, 20181 votes

Right, I feel like the snowball might actually be enough though right now that IF THE WORST team gets a slight lead, whether from having TP up, a cheeky gank, or whatever that ends in FB/FB tower it helps them win the game so much more then their skill will.

I fully agree though the better team generally can and will win in the long game, and honestly it makes more sense for the better team to win off of a smart play because they will keep making smart choices. But back a few seasons ago when you got ganked at 3:15, it didn't mean you were worthless for the next 20 minutes. You could out play and still come out ahead in the game. I feel like this is mostly gone now because one death and you are 700+ gold and 2 levels behind so you just flat out cant win.

Basically I think we both agree overall, I just feel like the game is currently in a position that makes bad players look better simply because of how strong small leads can become.

ModKnightsKemplarMar 7, 20181 votes

Yes, that's fair.

And for the record, I would love to see first blood and first tower bonuses totally eliminated. I think you already get enough of a lead from just getting the objective. They already have the shields in place to prevent lane swapping in pro play; doesn't make sense to me to keep extra gold on top of that.

Even without that extra bonus, we should (and would, I predict) still see a >50% chance that the "first tower/blood" team wins. Getting the 500 for the kill cleanly should mean something; there's no good gameplay, imo, encouraged by allowed the guy who died second to get an extra bonus in the early game 1v1. No reason for that.

Pika FoxMar 7, 20181 votes

You would need to look at individual champion winrates and stuff for that then, as theres still the possibility champs who are late game oriented get first tower anyway or are ahead in the beginning of the game from just playing better.

PandeonorMar 6, 20181 votes

{quoted}

In 6/10 games at Diamond, a single mistake made by the bottom lane costs the tower and snowballs the game out of control.

The better botlane (2 out of five players (perhaps 3 with jngl) are better then their opponents) with concludent first tower shifts chances of a team from 50/50 to 60/40? In 40% of the games the first tower botlane did not lead straight to a win?

Hm.

I am not sure that I get it. What would be the correct %age for the chance of a win after loosing a tower [and giving kills] botlane?

And I don´t understand the mentioned statistic. Is this "first tower botlane" or "first tower in match"? Wich would lead to the question what the statistic tells if another lane did first tower.

And why thread is about 75% and not 60%?

And in 3/10 matches bot is autofilled? 30% autofilled botlane in diamond? Sure? Sup? Is the rate for sups in dia really that bad?

Some strange numbers here. Would like to have this confirmed please.

???

YennMar 7, 20182 votes

{quoted}

The better botlane (2 out of five players (perhaps 3 with jngl) are better then their opponents) with concludent first tower shifts chances of a team from 50/50 to 60/40? In 40% of the games the first tower botlane did not lead straight to a win?

Hm.

I am not sure that I get it. What would be the correct %age for the chance of a win after loosing a tower [and giving kills] botlane?

And I don´t understand the mentioned statistic. Is this "first tower botlane" or "first tower in match"? Wich would lead to the question what the statistic tells if another lane did first tower.

And why thread is about 75% and not 60%?

And in 3/10 matches bot is autofilled? 30% autofilled botlane in diamond? Sure? Sup? Is the rate for sups in dia really that bad?

Some strange numbers here. Would like to have this confirmed please.

???

Support is very rarely (almost never) auto-filled in Diamond. ADC is the most common auto-fill, followed by jungle and top.

I'm saying that 60% of the time bottom tower is lost, it was because of a single mistake, not necessarily because one team was playing better. The team that made the mistake could have been outplaying the opponents up until that singular mistake that cost the tower and likely the game, but their wins were too early to push down the tower.

The entire issue here is that it's often one instant around 10 minutes that causes the first tower to go down, and that event has a high correlation to significantly increased win rate. It basically renders everything that happened prior (and likely after) irrelevant, unless there's some serious feeding.

PandeonorMar 7, 20181 votes

{quoted}

I'm saying that 60% of the time bottom tower is lost, it was because of a single mistake, not necessarily because one team was playing better.

That mistakes don´t happen is a sign of quality or IS playing better. You can´t play chess, soccer, Bobsleight.... any sports... and claim "oh, that was a mistake" if you are playing on high level. You can still win if you start slow with a Bob - if you are good.

The entire issue here is that it's often one instant around 10 minutes that causes the first tower to go down, and that event has a high correlation to significantly increased win rate. It basically renders everything that happened prior (and likely after) irrelevant, unless there's some serious feeding.

A lead out of a mistake of the other team.... after around 10 Minutes out of a 30 minutes game.... gives a 10% higher likelyhood of a win [if your numbers are correct]. I don´t get the point here.

And not one of my questions above is answered. You claim that 30% of all diamond matches start with an autofilled ADC. I would like to see the database for this as well.

Not only that I don´t see the issue but I doubt that the given numbers are correct because they don´t seem to be coherent.

YennMar 7, 20181 votes

{quoted}

That mistakes don´t happen is a sign of quality or IS playing better. You can´t play chess, soccer, Bobsleight.... any sports... and claim "oh, that was a mistake" if you are playing on high level. You can still win if you start slow with a Bob - if you are good.

A lead out of a mistake of the other team.... after around 10 Minutes out of a 30 minutes game.... gives a 10% higher likelyhood of a win [if your numbers are correct]. I don´t get the point here.

And not one of my questions above is answered. You claim that 30% of all diamond matches start with an autofilled ADC. I would like to see the database for this as well.

Not only that I don´t see the issue but I doubt that the given numbers are correct because they don´t seem to be coherent.

Riot won't provide statistics on auto-fill, and we can only guess why. You won't find a single Diamond player who has anything positive to say about it, and everyone generally agrees on how common it is.

I'm not sure if you're being ignorant on purpose, but the team that takes the first tower wins the game 75% of the time, not 60%, as it clearly says in the title (which you seem to be unable to read). It's not just 10% more likely that they win, it's 25% more likely to win, which is a massive increase.

The 60%/30% I provided were estimates of what causes the first tower to be lost. Which is clear, if you actually stop and read anything I posted.

Once you have the advantages first tower gives (dragon, often 2-3 kills, loss of jungle control, loss of another turret during the rotation, rift herald, etc.), you can just push and end the game with an overwhelming gold advantage, without the enemy team having any opportunity to make a come back. It literally devolves into a game of numbers, unless the lead is thrown out of stupidity, which rarely happens at higher levels.

You can play perfectly up until 10 minutes and capitalize on half a dozen enemy mistakes, but none that allow you to take the turret, but then the enemy team can turn around on just one mistake from you and close out the game.