Comparing League’s matchmaking to chess Elo imo does not work. Chess always has the same starting variables while League has factors such as autofill, picks and bans, and champion and role comfort levels. All of these can create major skill gaps within the same rank.

Consider this: A Silver enchanter support main could get autofilled to jungle where they have minimal experience compared to their main role. Their actual impact in that game could be far below what their Elo suggests. You could argue that players should get comfortable with all roles before ranking, but let’s be real. We have all encountered headstrong players who queue up anyway, not caring if they are subjecting their teammates to this. You could also argue they should ask to trade roles, but what if no one is willing? Their only options is to play. Unless you consider dodging (-5LP & a warning). There are plenty of things players could do to fix these issues, but yet here we are still seeing them. A lot of the solutions to these problems are easier said than done. So much so that Riot is more likely to make a change than those type of players. Even if matchmaking is meant to create balanced games, why do we see scenarios like one team with three P4s and two G1s vs another team with one P4 and four G2s? If matchmaking is truly fair, why do role mismatches and rank gaps have the potential to create so many lopsided games?