The ranked points system can be quite frustrating and we've repeatedly asked for more transparency regarding how exactly the system works.

From my experience with the system and other similar systems, I can say that the system is prone to greater variance in the beginning of your journey as the system is still calculating where it thinks you should be. This means that as more data is gained through you playing, it can more accurately predict where you should fall in relation to your opponents and, based on that, awards and deducts points accordingly.

If it works as other systems do, it's probably designed with the intent of trying to keep each player at a 50% win rate and pairs players up with that in mind. This isn't 100% foolproof, of course, as games are subject to RNG and the pool of players available at any given time in the queue.

As I said, though, we don't have a clear breakdown of how the system works, so this is just my best guess based on what I've seen. In the situation you described, if you've still ended your day at a net gain of RP, I think that's reasonable depending on the exact numbers gained/lost. For example, if those two losses were to people in the top 10, then your losses should have been relatively minimal as their win rate should be at least comparable if not better, but if you lost to players whose win rates are significantly lower, then losing the max -150 is also reasonable as the system may not have enough aggregate data for you to gauge the correct gain/loss.

I still advocate for a base point gain with an added amount adjusted based on your ranking (read: MMR). I believe anybody who has at least a 66% win rate should generally end at a net gain, even if a small one. So if I play three players (or even the same player), all of whom the system expects me to win against, and I win two of those matches, I should still be up at least a small number of points. With that in mind, I think a base +60 for wins would be enough.

With this in mind, if Player A is expected to win against Player B and plays that same player three times in a row, it might look something like this:

Game 1: Player A wins against Player B and receives the following reward: (Base +60 gain) + (MMR-adjusted +15 gain) = +75 RP gained

Game 2: Player A wins against Player B and receives the following reward: (Base +60 gain) + (MMR-adjusted +15 gain) = +75 RP gained

Game 3: Player A loses against Player B and receives the following reward: (MMR-adjusted -150 loss) = -150 RP gained

This scenario would still result in Player A breaking even. So, Player A should be able to maintain or improve their position on the leaderboard if they are able to maintain a 66% win rate in their current MMR bracket. As they move up or down in MMR brackets where their performance does not reflect that bracket, their position within the bracket and as shown on their leaderboard ranking should normalize once enough data is collected.

I may have gotten a little off-topic there, now that I look back on it. Oh well. /shrug

The ranking system is why I quit playing.