Why Riot is re-mapping MMR to rank — and why it matters for your climb

When Riot quietly tweaked the way hidden MMR maps to visible ranks, a lot of players felt it immediately: different LP swings, weirder promotion timing, and—if you’re in Iron or Diamond—maybe finally facing opponents who actually match what your rank should mean. Riot’s dev post on March 2, 2026 announced those changes and explained the reasoning: make ranked games feel fairer and more consistent across the entire ladder. This isn’t just technical housekeeping. It’s a nudge at how the whole competitive experience reads to players.

Below I unpack what they changed, why they changed it, who wins (and who doesn’t), and what to expect next for Ranked climbs.

What Riot changed (the short version)

• Riot adjusted the MMR-to-rank distribution so that the mapping between hidden skill (MMR) and visible rank (Iron → Challenger) better reflects differences in demonstrated ability.
• At the bottom of the ladder, Iron’s MMR band was shifted so more seasoned-but-struggling players move into Bronze, leaving Iron closer to a true “learning” tier.
• At the top, the upper Diamond MMRs were pushed into Master’s range to reduce the enormous skill spread inside Diamond and make climbing through Diamond less painful.
• These shifts widened Master’s MMR range and raised practical LP thresholds for Grandmaster and Challenger, which Riot says they’re monitoring and may adjust before next season.
• Riot also flagged upcoming work on autofill, role parity, Apex tier duoing, and LP resolution for Master+ games.

(Source: Riot dev post, March 2, 2026.)

Why this matters for players

• Match quality: Better alignment between MMR and rank should reduce the number of matches where one team contains players who are clearly over- or under-skilled for the division label on their profile.
• Clarity of skill expectations: If you’re in Gold or Platinum, Riot’s goal is that players within the same rank should share a baseline of game knowledge and macro expectations—making games more predictable for learning and teaching.
• More meaningful progression: Iron becomes a safer place for real beginners to play without being dominated by veterans who “belong” at higher visible ranks but have stayed in Iron due to LP quirks or alternating demotions/promotions.
• Harder apex tiers (for now): Master, Grandmaster and Challenger players may see different LP dynamics while Riot balances population vs. MMR spread.

Who benefits and who might feel the friction

• Beneficiaries

  • Newer players: Iron being more of a true learn-to-play tier can reduce stomps and help new players find teammates with similar fundamentals.
  • Skilled-but-stuck players: People who actually belong in Bronze/low Silver but were trapped in Iron could see more consistent matchmaking.
  • Climbers in Diamond: Narrowing the skill spread within Diamond should make promotions feel more linear and less grindy.

• Players who may notice pushback

  • Some Master+ players: Wider MMR in Master made LP math shift for Grandmaster/Challenger; Riot is aware and monitoring LP consistency.
  • People used to exploit rank irregularities (smurfs, account sellers): Changes aim to reduce those edge cases, so some old tricks will be less effective.

The broader competitive design thinking

Riot’s changes are a window into how modern competitive systems balance two things that often pull in opposite directions:

• Psychological progression: Visible ranks and promotions are motivating. Letting players feel upward movement keeps people engaged.
• Statistical fairness: Matchmaking must pair players of similar demonstrated skill to make games meaningful and teachable.

Too much emphasis on visible progression without aligning the hidden MMR leads to mismatches, confusing LP swings, and a poorer learning environment. Riot’s mapping adjustment is an attempt to reset that balance: keep the motivational benefits of ranks while reducing the mismatch noise.

What to watch next (and practical takeaways)

• Autofill and role parity tests (noted for 26.4/26.5 rollout) — these directly affect queue fairness and how long you wait to play your chosen role.
• LP fixes for Master+ — if you play Apex tiers, expect changes aimed at stabilizing +/− LP outcomes.
• Potential new tier below Iron — Riot hinted they might add a true-stepping-stone tier for fresh players if Iron still isn’t distinct enough.

Practical advice for climbers:

• Focus on wins, not short-term LP swings. MMR moves your long-term trajectory even when visible LP looks weird.
• Track average LP gain per win over multiple games—those numbers are the best signal of whether your MMR is above or below your visible rank.
• If you’re a high-skill player stuck in a low visible rank, expect the system to pull you up faster now that Riot is re-mapping ranges.

A few implementation notes (for context nerds)

• Riot didn’t change how MMR is calculated per game (it’s still primarily win/loss driven); they changed how that hidden number translates into the visible rank bands.
• Expanding MMR ranges at the top or shifting bands at the bottom is a blunt tool—effective for population-level fixes, but it requires listening to player data after deployment (which Riot said they’re doing).
• These changes are iterative. Expect small follow-up patches over the coming months as Riot checks queue times, LP distribution, and player experience signals.

My take

This feels like a long-overdue re-centering. Visible ranks are the social language of League—the badge you and your friends talk about. If that language stops meaningfully matching the players behind the badge, it erodes the ladder’s usefulness for learning and for measuring progress. Riot’s MMR-to-rank re-mapping aims to restore that trust: make ranks informative again, reduce weird LP variance, and give beginners a safer space to learn.

It won’t be perfect overnight—changes like this always create ripple effects—but Riot’s transparency about the goals and the planned follow-ups (autofill, LP fixes, Apex duoing) is a good sign. If you play ranked seriously, keep an eye on your LP per win trends and the Master+/Grandmaster LP behavior Riot said they’ll address.

Sources

• Riot Games Dev: "/dev: MMR-to-Rank Distribution" — Riot Phroxzon, March 2, 2026.
  https://www.leagueoflegends.com/en-gb/news/dev/dev-mmr-to-rank-distribution/

• League of Legends Wiki: "Rank" — background on LP vs. MMR and ranked systems.
  https://wiki.leagueoflegends.com/en-us/Rank

• TrueMMR: "League of Legends MMR Checker" — community tool explaining LP/MMR behavior and player estimators.
  https://truemmr.com/

When a horror blockbuster outsells a tennis game: why Resident Evil Requiem’s UK launch matters

The moment a survival-horror epic shakes up the UK retail charts and quietly outperforms a bright, family-friendly Mario tennis title is the sort of headline that makes you rethink platform dynamics. Resident Evil Requiem launched on 27 February 2026 and immediately grabbed the number one spot in the UK physical charts — and the details underneath that top line are the interesting part.

Quick snapshot

• Resident Evil Requiem debuted at number 1 on the UK physical charts the week after its 27 February 2026 release.
• Platform split for Requiem’s launch week: PS5 54%, PC 36%, Xbox 6%, Switch 2 4%.
• Industry observers say Requiem’s first-week Switch 2 sales were “broadly the same” as Cyberpunk 2077: Ultimate Edition’s Switch 2 performance last year.
• Requiem’s launch week physical sales outpaced both Resident Evil 4 (remake) and Resident Evil Village, and — notably for Nintendo watchers — did more in week one than Mario Tennis Fever. (nintendolife.com)

What the numbers are actually telling us

On paper, 4% for Switch 2 looks tiny — and it is small relative to PS5 and PC — but context matters:

• Switch 2 is still early in its lifecycle and many third-party launches are leaning into game-key cards rather than full cartridges. That affects how some publishers and consumers approach physical copies.
• Comparing Switch 2 numbers to past Switch/console launches is fraught: the install base, consumer expectations, and distribution choices (real cart vs key card) all change how physical sales look. Yet, the assertion that Requiem’s Switch 2 physical sales mirror Cyberpunk 2077’s Switch 2 week-one is notable because Cyberpunk’s Switch 2 release was an unexpectedly strong third-party showing. (gamesradar.com)

Why a mature, third‑person horror game beating Mario Tennis matters

• Audience overlap and shelf space — Mario Tennis Fever targets families and casual players; Resident Evil targets an older, franchise-loyal crowd. For Requiem to outsell Mario Tennis in physical UK retail suggests strong core-fan purchases and collector interest (physical editions still matter to that audience).
• Third-party momentum on Switch 2 — Cyberpunk 2077’s strong Switch 2 performance earlier set a benchmark for how third-party, big-budget Western games could find a market on Nintendo’s new handheld-console hybrid. Requiem showing similar Switch 2 physical traction implies the platform can still be a meaningful revenue source for non-Nintendo AAA titles — even if as a modest slice of the whole. (gamesradar.com)
• Physical demand persists — Despite an industry tilt to digital, certain franchises drive physical purchases: collectors, special editions, and players who prefer ownership of a tangible product. Requiem’s performance — and the appearance of a “Generation Pack” (Switch 2 exclusive bundle) in the top 10 — highlights how packaging and exclusivity still move units. (nintendolife.com)

Platform strategy and physical formats

• Game-key cards vs cartridges: Some publishers opt for game-key cards on Switch 2 to save costs and logistics; others release traditional cartridges. CD Projekt’s decision to use cartridges for Cyberpunk previously was singled out as a factor in its strong physical sales on Switch 2. Choices like that affect retail visibility and buyer preference. Requiem’s sales suggest that even with key cards being common, a strong brand will still push physical sales. (gamesradar.com)
• The long tail matters: Requiem’s launch top spot is an initial snapshot. Sustained sales (and digital performance) will show whether this is a one-week peak or a longer franchise resurgence. Early Steam concurrent peaks and PC success also paint a fuller picture beyond physical UK charts. (gamesradar.com)

Notes for Nintendo and third‑party watchers

• Don’t read 4% as failure — for Switch 2-specific strategy, small slices can still be profitable, and they often come with higher ancillary revenue (deluxe editions, merch, digital DLC).
• Comparative benchmarks (like Cyberpunk 2077) matter because they show a precedent: big Western AA/AAA games can carve out a meaningful niche on Switch 2 if handled right.
• Mario Tennis Fever’s drop behind a mature horror release is a reminder that launch hype doesn’t guarantee sustained retail dominance; competition and catalog dynamics quickly reshuffle the charts. (gamesasylum.com)

What to watch next

• Week-to-week chart movement for Requiem and Mario Tennis Fever to see whether Requiem holds momentum or if Nintendo-first titles reassert themselves.
• Digital storefront performance and worldwide sales reports (Capcom’s statements and Steam/PC metrics) for a fuller commercial picture.
• Whether more publishers choose cartridges over key cards for future Switch 2 releases — decisions here will shape physical retail performance going forward. (gamesradar.com)

Final thoughts

A horror blockbuster topping the UK physical charts and outpacing a Nintendo-branded tennis game is a tidy reminder that the videogame market still loves surprises. It’s not just about platform loyalties; it’s about franchises that capture attention, smart release formats, and the persistent appetite for physical editions among certain buyers. Resident Evil Requiem’s launch week is a useful case study: big-name third-party games can still make an impact on Nintendo’s new hardware, even if they grab only a sliver of the platform split.

Sources

• UK Charts: Resident Evil Requiem Switch 2 Sales Comparable To Cyberpunk 2077. Nintendo Life.
  https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2026/03/uk-charts-resident-evil-requiem-switch-2-sales-comparable-to-cyberpunk-2077

• Resident Evil Requiem sets series record on Steam within an hour of launch. GamesRadar+.
  https://www.gamesradar.com/games/resident-evil/resident-evil-requiem-sets-series-record-on-steam-within-an-hour-of-launch-hitting-a-peak-of-260-000

• CD Projekt’s cartridge decision and Switch 2 physical sales. GamesRadar (report on Cyberpunk 2077 Switch 2 physical success).
  https://www.gamesradar.com/games/cyberpunk/cd-projekt-said-ditching-game-key-cards-for-cyberpunk-2077-on-switch-2-was-the-right-thing-to-do-and-its-apparently-paid-off-because-75-percent-of-that-versions-sales-were-physical/

• Resident Evil Requiem (sales and chart notes). Wikipedia (summary of contemporary reporting).
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resident_Evil_Requiem

Why Berkshire’s new boss just named four “forever” stocks — and quietly shrugged at two others

When a company built by Warren Buffett hands the reins to Greg Abel, investors listen. In his first shareholder letter as Berkshire Hathaway’s CEO (published in early March 2026), Abel did more than salute the past — he clarified which holdings he views as “forever” and which ones didn’t make that inner circle. The choices are equal parts reassurance and subtle signal about what matters when stewardship changes but the mandate to preserve value doesn’t.

This matters because Berkshire’s portfolio is enormous, concentrated, and iconic. What the company says about its biggest positions matters for markets and for anyone trying to think long term about durable businesses.

What Abel called “forever” — and why it matters

Abel described four holdings as core, long-term positions Berkshire expects to own for decades:

• Apple
• American Express
• Coca-Cola
• Moody’s

Why those four? The common thread is clarity: strong brand moats, predictable cash flow, management teams Berkshire trusts, and business models that have shown resilience across cycles. Abel’s naming of these companies signals continuity with Buffett’s playbook: identify exceptional businesses, buy sizeable stakes at attractive prices, and hold through time.

A few quick context points:

• These four companies make up a large portion of Berkshire’s equity portfolio — together they’re a center of gravity for the firm’s public-equity bets.
• Apple in particular is massive for Berkshire by market value; Coke and AmEx are classic Buffett examples of consumer and financial moats; Moody’s offers a high-margin, durable niche in credit-rating services.

The two notable omissions

Two of Berkshire’s other very large holdings were notably absent from Abel’s “forever” roster:

• Bank of America
• Chevron

That doesn’t mean they’re being sold tomorrow. But omission is itself information. In Bank of America’s case, Berkshire has already trimmed its position significantly in recent quarters, and Buffett historically points to stakes he truly intends to “maintain indefinitely” — the omission hints at reduced conviction or simply a pragmatic reweighting. Chevron remains a huge position but is more exposed to commodity cycles and capital allocation debates than the four Abel singled out.

Why this distinction matters for investors

• Signaling vs. action: Naming a stock as “forever” is not a trade order, but it is a governance signal. It tells shareholders what management views as reliable anchors of capital allocation.
• Style clarity: The four “forever” names reinforce Buffett-era core principles — brands, margins, predictability — while the omitted names underscore that portfolio composition can shift even at a company famous for buy-and-hold.
• Succession risk and continuity: Abel’s list reassures those worried that Berkshire might abandon Buffett’s temperament. It also highlights the open question of who will make day-to-day portfolio choices; Abel inherited stewardship responsibilities but doesn’t have the same public track record as Buffett.

How to think about “forever” stocks for your own portfolio

• “Forever” for Berkshire ≠ forever for every investor. Berkshire’s stake sizes, tax position, and horizon are unique.
• Look for durable cash flows and pricing power, not just nostalgia. Coca-Cola’s brand vs. Chevron’s commodity exposure illustrates the difference.
• Be honest about concentration: Berkshire’s approach is concentrated bets. Most individual investors should balance conviction with diversification.
• Reassess when the business changes, not when the stock price does. Holding forever means monitoring the business — management quality, competitive edge, and capital allocation — not checking charts daily.

A few concrete investor takeaways

• If you admire Buffett-style investing, study why Apple, AmEx, Coke, and Moody’s fit that mold rather than simply copy the tickers.
• Treat the omission of Bank of America and Chevron as a reminder that even blue-chip holdings can be downgraded in conviction.
• For long-term investors, focus on business durability and management incentives; for traders, these signals may matter more for short-term flows than long-term fundamentals.

What this moment reveals about Berkshire itself

• Continuity with adaptation: Abel’s letter emphasizes sticking to durable businesses while acknowledging an evolving portfolio and new capital-allocation dynamics.
• Cash pile and patience: Berkshire still holds massive cash reserves — a tactical advantage if valuations wobble and buying opportunities appear.
• Uncertainty in day-to-day management: With the portfolio’s traditional stewards reshuffled, the market is watching how Berkshire will source new big ideas and allocate capital at scale.

My take

Abel’s naming of four “forever” stocks reads like a careful bridge: it comforts investors who feared a wholesale departure from Buffett’s philosophy, while also hinting that practical decisions — trimming, adding, and pivoting — will continue. For most individual investors, the lesson isn’t to buy these exact names blindly; it’s to adopt Berkshire’s discipline: buy strong businesses with durable advantages and hold them until the story truly changes.

Sources

• Berkshire Hathaway's CEO Suggests These 4 Companies Are Forever Stocks—and 2 That Might Not Be. Barron’s.
  https://www.barrons.com/articles/berkshire-hathaway-forever-stocks-apple-american-express-coca-cola-moodys-c71e573e

• Warren Buffett's successor touted 4 of his most iconic stock picks — and they're up 10 to 50 times since he bought them. Business Insider.
  https://www.businessinsider.com/warren-buffett-greg-abel-stock-picks-investing-apple-coke-amex-2026-3

• Berkshire Hathaway Stocks and Holdings. Kiplinger.
  https://www.kiplinger.com/investing/stocks/warren-buffett-stocks-berkshire-hathaway-portfolio