Forum
Fatman_x takes the 2010 TAZD; computation of complete standings in progress.
Posted By: skrumgaer at 6:51 PM, Saturday January 1, 2011 EST
Here are Fatman_x's final stats:
1631 22% 16% 13% 12% 10% 11% 11% 22535 Fatman_x
Olkainry38 did not play any additional games after Dec 21.
Here were the two leaders on Dec 21:
1591 22% 16% 13% 13% 10% 11% 11% 21975 Fatman_x
0894 22% 20% 16% 13% 11% 08% 07% 21798 olkainry38
The November scores are below. They were recomputed when I found I had been using the 2009 datum instead of the 2010 datum.
The Test Against Zero Datum (TAZD) is a weighted sum of the squares of the differences between a player's percentage profile and the profile of a typical player with a zero score, adjusted according to the square root of the number of games played. If you would like to enter the cumulative TAZD competition for 2010, reply to this thread in the account that you want to enter.
In 2010, the cumulative TAZD began in April, because some January, February, and March profiles had corrupted percentages.
A minimum of sixty regular games per month was required.
Entries show number of games, percentages, and player name.
A minimum of 540 regular games played was required to remain in the standings as of December 31.
Here are the end of November standings with the new datum.
0815 22% 20% 16% 13% 11% 09% 07% 20192 olkainry38
1324 22% 16% 13% 13% 10% 13% 11% 19645 Fatman_x
0886 21% 18% 18% 13% 11% 08% 07% 19382 the full monte
1612 15% 19% 16% 14% 14% 11% 07% 17412 Xar
2297 18% 15% 14% 15% 13% 13% 10% 17190 Fonias
1282 19% 15% 14% 14% 13% 13% 09% 14698 ProxyCheater
1089 19% 16% 12% 15% 13% 12% 09% 14359 ZIGIBOOM
1817 16% 18% 12% 10% 11% 13% 16% 14038 cool g
0731 18% 22% 12% 10% 08% 11% 16% 14010 leeroy jenkins
1810 19% 14% 12% 12% 13% 15% 12% 13270 caesar-blue
2990 13% 11% 11% 08% 09% 10% 34% 12928 noamlang1
0519 21% 15% 18% 11% 12% 08% 12% 12080 chaiNblade
1597 19% 14% 09% 09% 10% 13% 24% 11916 greekboi
0769 22% 14% 09% 13% 13% 13% 14% 11355 dasfury
1054 18% 14% 13% 13% 12% 11% 15% 09627 yellowfin
0698 17% 15% 10% 13% 14% 14% 13% 06707 speciale528
0662 17% 14% 12% 12% 13% 13% 15% 06340 AlexBallDrop
1122 11% 15% 15% 14% 11% 12% 18% 05785 pooch723
1625 16% 12% 11% 10% 12% 15% 22% 06512 kendawg
0613 14% 11% 17% 11% 11% 15% 16% 04945 vIRGI
1631 22% 16% 13% 12% 10% 11% 11% 22535 Fatman_x
Olkainry38 did not play any additional games after Dec 21.
Here were the two leaders on Dec 21:
1591 22% 16% 13% 13% 10% 11% 11% 21975 Fatman_x
0894 22% 20% 16% 13% 11% 08% 07% 21798 olkainry38
The November scores are below. They were recomputed when I found I had been using the 2009 datum instead of the 2010 datum.
The Test Against Zero Datum (TAZD) is a weighted sum of the squares of the differences between a player's percentage profile and the profile of a typical player with a zero score, adjusted according to the square root of the number of games played. If you would like to enter the cumulative TAZD competition for 2010, reply to this thread in the account that you want to enter.
In 2010, the cumulative TAZD began in April, because some January, February, and March profiles had corrupted percentages.
A minimum of sixty regular games per month was required.
Entries show number of games, percentages, and player name.
A minimum of 540 regular games played was required to remain in the standings as of December 31.
Here are the end of November standings with the new datum.
0815 22% 20% 16% 13% 11% 09% 07% 20192 olkainry38
1324 22% 16% 13% 13% 10% 13% 11% 19645 Fatman_x
0886 21% 18% 18% 13% 11% 08% 07% 19382 the full monte
1612 15% 19% 16% 14% 14% 11% 07% 17412 Xar
2297 18% 15% 14% 15% 13% 13% 10% 17190 Fonias
1282 19% 15% 14% 14% 13% 13% 09% 14698 ProxyCheater
1089 19% 16% 12% 15% 13% 12% 09% 14359 ZIGIBOOM
1817 16% 18% 12% 10% 11% 13% 16% 14038 cool g
0731 18% 22% 12% 10% 08% 11% 16% 14010 leeroy jenkins
1810 19% 14% 12% 12% 13% 15% 12% 13270 caesar-blue
2990 13% 11% 11% 08% 09% 10% 34% 12928 noamlang1
0519 21% 15% 18% 11% 12% 08% 12% 12080 chaiNblade
1597 19% 14% 09% 09% 10% 13% 24% 11916 greekboi
0769 22% 14% 09% 13% 13% 13% 14% 11355 dasfury
1054 18% 14% 13% 13% 12% 11% 15% 09627 yellowfin
0698 17% 15% 10% 13% 14% 14% 13% 06707 speciale528
0662 17% 14% 12% 12% 13% 13% 15% 06340 AlexBallDrop
1122 11% 15% 15% 14% 11% 12% 18% 05785 pooch723
1625 16% 12% 11% 10% 12% 15% 22% 06512 kendawg
0613 14% 11% 17% 11% 11% 15% 16% 04945 vIRGI
superxchloe wrote
at 1:52 PM, Wednesday January 12, 2011 EST Okay so I just need to say things three times before you'll respond to them skrum?
The TAZD is meant to measure positive skill. Correct? Positive skill in this game is the same as 'being good at kdice.' 'Having fun while playing kdice' can't really be measured with statistics. I am not talking about skill in general. Again, I am ONLY talking about the 'positive skill' the TAZD is meant to measure. And again: The most frustrating part of this discussion has not been the disagreements. It has been your unwillingness to listen, skrum. I understand that you believe in the TAZD as the best measure of skill that currently exists, but you admit that it is not perfect. I really think that if someone suggests a change, you listen to what they have to say and their argument for the change. imho, it is ridiculous that you have spent so much time twisting your arguments but haven't even referenced the suggested changes. |
skrumgaer wrote
at 2:05 PM, Wednesday January 12, 2011 EST I did propose a tweak to the TAZD (a 48% cap on sevenths) way back in Reply 158 but Vermont jumped on it in Reply 159 by saying that it shows that the TAZD is flawed. Yes, the TAZD is flawed in that it is not childproof.
I will introduce some childproofing into the TAZD, but what it is I will keep to myself. |
superxchloe wrote
at 2:10 PM, Wednesday January 12, 2011 EST I really think that if someone suggests a change, you listen to what they have to say and their argument for the change.
|
skrumgaer wrote
at 2:31 PM, Wednesday January 12, 2011 EST I have already mentioned that I have other stats that reflect changes suggested (such as negative points for 5ths, 6ths, and 7ths). Just the fact that I have several stats indicates I don't think the TAZD is the full story. I report on two of them frequently (the TAZD and the baseball-style standings) so that readers can notice differences in the rankings and make comments. I think it is better to have several stats to report than to try to make one stat that does everything.
Other stats that I have are the convolution integral (level of skill at a table) and the net dom (a new one, possibly measuring propensity to flag/wimpiness). |
superxchloe wrote
at 2:49 PM, Wednesday January 12, 2011 EST Just stop trying to sell the TAZD as a measure of positive skill, since that is NOT what it is.
I think that if you want to compare standings based on different metrics they should be reported in an easily comparable fashion, ie in the same post. The general consensus on net dom is that the dom stat as reported in the stats page is useless, and thus any manipulation thereof would also be useless. This discussion has become impossible. Monte and Vermont- when I asked around at the tables, the consensus there was that 4th should be negative so we'll start out that way then change it if it ends up working out badly. |
skrumgaer wrote
at 2:52 PM, Wednesday January 12, 2011 EST Good idea chloe about using the same post. I normally report them in successive posts but because of differences in bumping they get separated.
|
skrumgaer wrote
at 2:54 PM, Wednesday January 12, 2011 EST Chloe: If I do a Spearman rank-correlation test of the TAZD versus the ASR, and the value of r is positive, would you concede that the TAZD is a positive measure of skill?
|
montecarlo wrote
at 4:07 PM, Wednesday January 12, 2011 EST yes skrum, ill agree with that.
heres the test scenario. player1: 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 player1: 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 player1: 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 player1: 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 player1: 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 player1: 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 player1: 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 test the TAZD against the ASR. if they have a positive correlation according to spearman, then the TAZD is a measure of positive skill. but, ive got a hunch on this dataset that the TAZD will be a measure of negative skill. |
montecarlo wrote
at 4:07 PM, Wednesday January 12, 2011 EST whoops, meant player1 through player7, not 7 player1's.
|
superxchloe wrote
at 4:45 PM, Wednesday January 12, 2011 EST gosh monte you should know better. The TAZD requires a number of games and the ASR requires a number of games and a ppg!
|