Why am I such a bad debater

Despite putting a lot of time into my debates, I only have a 50% win rate.

Granted, I do accept absurd topics, but still... what should I learn to improve.

Embrace the idea that winning isn't everything. Debaters who gets winrates likes Oromagi, Ragnar and Ramshutu grow sick and tired of debating because it was a chore from day one where they never really stood for all that much nor flexed their ability all that well.

If winrate and Rating are everything to you, unfortunately it's merely a timing issue. Oromagi, Ragnar and Ramshutu as well as even myself were around when some trolls were here who were easy to defeat, the average debater has improved as this site seems to only retain tryhards in the long-run.

You should begin by asking what winning a debate comes down to, it's not actual logical warfare, it's voter mind-manipulation warfare. Study closely the way people interpret certain 'bad faith' angles vs when they call it a clever Kritik and over time build a repertoire that leads to you being very creative in how you ease the opponent into going for angles and styles of debating that you know voters don't care about or worse, punish.

You want your opponent to seem dull, not necessarily stupid or evil but dull. The audience needs to feel like each Round from you is pure juice whereas each Round from the opponent is some bitter-tasting water-like substance.

Then, after you have done that, of course the Chess elements of debating play a factor. You need to ask what precisely a topic is, wonder how to interpret each word in the title and how to twist your enemy's logic against themselves. Do this and it doesn't matter if you lose, you are essentially going to the gym for your mind with each debate, it will keep you stimulated.

Thanks for the advice. 

In any competitive arena, most people are going to fall in the middle of the distribution. 

It depends on the ranking system actually, for other systems most people appear in the lower quartile of it and it's much more of a steep slope at the top, as opposed to the bell curve you are presuming.

For instance, if we took the ranking system that the game League of Legends has, most fall into the lowest 3 rank brackets (Iron, Bronze and Silver), by far outnumbering those in the middle 2 rank brackets (Gold and Platinum) and even further outnumbering those in the highest rank brackets.

I would encourage you to study logical fallacies - that's where I started. After that, research, not any one subject - everything - anything you can get your hands on, and make sure that you don't look up stuff like - "things that prove xyz" - look up - "xyz" -  and follow where the evidence leads you. Break down anything and everything and keep a lookout for those fallacies you learned about - make sure that you are interpreting what you learn correctly and not through a biased lens. 

Alright

I don't think wrestling has belts or sashes but in Kung Fu, most fighters are white-to-orange.

That should be obvious. However, I do understand what you are saying, was just pointing out there's 2 variations of distribution in a competitive environment.

Yeah the same distribution occurs in BJJ, most people don't get past blue belt.

You’re not a bad debater. Records can only tell so much of the story, and you shouldn’t feel that your effectiveness as a debater is solely tied to them. You know how to present a logical and persuasive argument, you can do it on a variety of topics, and you don’t play it safe, going up against other skilled debaters on topics that may put you at a disadvantage with many voters, which is bound to yield some losses.

Try to look at every loss as an opportunity to hone your skills. Most of them should give you some practicable information on what you can do to improve. Take advantage of every opportunity, and no one can call you a bad debater.

Thank you

50% sounds pretty decent to me.

Though I suppose you're not winning 'all the time.

2.86% sounds like a bad score to me.

sort Debate Art users by the most losts. Who is the top user?

That's right, you thought it would be a troll, but it was me, SelDIOra! (pun aside, yes, I am the same user who has the most losses on this site)

If you read my most quality debates and articles (gun control, charter school, smoking ban), etc. You'll realize that I'm actually very strong, I just choose bad topics and ideas. If you want an idea of me at my true peak, I'd estimate I'm on par with Undefeatable at least (no. 5 on leaderboard currently).

Losing/winning isn't everything. 

I can confirm personally that gugigor's skills are on par with mine. If you can tango with Gugigor, you can definitely beat me. 

Interesting, I didn't consider your argument for gun control all that strong - you certainly have stronger arguments. Undefeatable has a vastly different style of debating from you - and, in my opinion, better. No offense. 

I disagree, heavily. lol

I can see why, but Gugigor just doesn't really try his best 99% of the time LOL. Also, I use too much expert stacking which some people can destroy (fauxlaw and the gang).

Hm, I haven't seen a debate from him I consider stronger than yours - at least not the time you beat me - though I don't believe Whiteflame correctly judged the debate, I do think that you did have a good argument. 

Before I defeat you, I must learn the 200iq skill of not trying to prove the Earth to be flat, young or made of cheese. Once I learn that, I will have a chance.