It wouldnt change the WIN percentage. In my above example of a 30% win rate plus a 20%draw rate you say Black would have a 50% chance of not losing, but then by the same chance White has a 70% of not losing. I am not saying discount draws I am saying they do not effect win percentage, which obviously they don't or they would be included in the win column. I think you are forgetting that even in the 600 draws from your example that that does not constitue a loss for white.
Out of 1,000 games if White wins 500 times there are 200 draws and and 300 wins for Black, you cannot say Black has a good chance of winning. Because even if they draw they didn't win so white still has the advantage in that they have a 70% chance of not losing. You cannot dispute that....with any amount of logic anyway.
I'm pretty sure you mean not losing percentage.
Well personally I think the Ruy is more practical because you will always have a nice buildup if you play good moves no matter what black plays where in the scotch black can liquidate the center and just simplify the position. I don't think you understand that black is perfectly fine in the scotch; it gives potential for attack but black has a comfortable himself.
That's baloney. In the Ruy you need to know MUCH more theory than in the Scotch, and furthermore, I still haven't seen what's being suggested to avoid black's drawing lines in the Ruy (the Berlin and the Marshall being the two main ones I can think of). Of course, by playing 2...Nc6 instead of the Petroff, black is somewhat signalling that he's playing somewhat for a win (though then why not play 1...e6 or 1...c5?) but this may play well into the hands of the Scotch player for white from a psychological perspective, because black is probably expecting a Ruy and doesn't like the feel of Scotches as much because he has less chances for advantage. Basically, it seems to me that White gets better winning chances in the Ruy but so does black. I prefer the Scotch to the Ruy, probably mostly because I never bothered learning all the ultra-deep theory of the Ruy, but have since eschewed them both for 3. Bc4, which I find does well for me, mostly because I've studied it much more deeply than my typical opponents.
I can't understand this because I play very well against the scotch. In the ruy it's quite tough for me as black to make a plan, so much so that it has made me stop playing ...e5 for the most part. If I play something like the chigorin variaiton, I find that all black really gets is the advanced pawn on c4 usually after white plays d5. Maybe attack on the queenside? But white on the other hand can choose to break on the kingside with f4 or g4, has more central space, and he can even possibly undermine black's queenside pawns to play there himself. I only know a few more moves after the chigorin for black, but it's clear that if I'm going against the ruy I need to study what to do! I have done just fine in the closed variations with white as his moves are more natural and I always get play. There is a huge amount of theory on the spanish, but how much of it you need to know depends. But that queenside plan is the only thing I could come up with for black so it's less natural! Maybe I could try ...f5 but white is probably more justified to do that.
It's not like I'm saying that the ruy is amazing because white can usually maintain a 0.2 advantage although that wouldn't be so bad to say. But it also has those psychological ideas of "what can black do to get counterplay". I think it's much harder to play as black in the closed ruy lopez so he needs to do more research.