Dire and Radiant Differences?

Let's say you have a 20p coin and a 50p coin, you toss both coins 100 times each. The 20p coin falls on heads 69 times, whereas the 50p coin only lands on heads 49 times. You could argue that there's an advantage to the 20p coin when it comes to drawing heads, or you could just accept it as luck.

https://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/experiments/statistics.html

Odds are either you've gotten better this last month in general (your overall winrate has gone up by 5% compared to the last 6 months), or you just had some luck with lineups, possibly even both. We're only talking about 47 games atm, so it's not that unlikely to see something as low as 30% or high as 70%.

not really/ radiant is better for both.

at top then have full vision and are safe from vision. though maybe half a second longer pathing. if you take

at bottom they have full vision and are closer. but take longer to get there. but are still there well before the rune pops.

what you said is not right at all.

This is called the law of averaging in the world of probability.
If there are two outcomes it is always 1/2 with all things remaining the same and no bias.
Simple.
You can get variations, as can be observed from the bell-curve, also called the normal distribution curve, mostly being one standard deviation in or out of the Main Standard Deviation .

Your theorycraft is not aimless.
His assumption fails on one point:
The map is not virtually homogeneous. Possibility of bias exists and must be explored.