Forum
oh hay look annual tazd* is back
|
superxchloe wrote
at 10:01 PM, Friday December 2, 2011 EST
The usual post, plus rankings:
Just say so if you'd like to join. If you have any questions about calculations or anything, just ask, and I'll happily answer. Suggestions are also always welcome and listened to. In fact! Monte recently suggested normalising the percentage profiles so everyone is on even footing- since not everyone's percentage profiles add to the same number. It's a small change, but it's an important one in my opinion. An average of 35 games per month are required, so your current total needs to be at least 385 games in order to participate. The TAZD* game bonus cap is 200 games per month- so, right now, it's 2200 games. Unless someone specifically requests otherwise, I'll also include everyone in the yearly TAZD. So far, I've included everyone with sufficient games that joined up to June. I'll add in the later entries soon. If you'd like to be removed, just say so, and I'll take you out no questions asked. CURRENT LEADERS: TAZD*: grandgnu, olkainry38, 1st.skyler ASRm: olkainry38, grandgnu, montecarlo ASR: Fonias, montecarlo, dasfury Spreadsheet is viewable and downloadable here: http://bit.ly/s8gXj2 It displays all this information as well as formulas for each system, players' percentage profiles, points, games, etc. This is sorted by TAZD*. ASRm ASR TAZD* Name 1.85 1040 27528 grandgnu 2.00 1639 23607 olkainry38 1.43 3465 18856 1st.skyler 1.47 2436 18425 Mercantile 1.32 2703 18272 kdiceplaya! 1.70 4051 17995 montecarlo 1.48 1136 17511 DrunkDaShiVa 1.40 7901 16127 Fonias 1.28 3456 15579 Gurgi 1.43 2261 15468 Loobee 1.22 1767 15354 cool g 1.38 1676 15014 stakaboo 1.46 0493 14330 Xar 1.24 3687 13605 dasfury 0.89 2351 13146 chaiNblade 1.27 1207 12932 caesar-blue 1.23 1822 11573 charliedontsurf 1.04 1158 10957 greekboi 1.18 0377 10911 Crazy Smurf 1.23 2449 10477 dottir 1.14 0369 09907 TheBetterYodel 1.14 1060 09300 Randomperfection 1.06 0396 09274 toad92 1.28 0088 08660 Kibble95 1.12 0058 07462 skrumgaer 0.98 -0293 06955 pooch723 0.94 -0037 04262 CCSKAOT 0.39 -0176 02721 joejoewhoa |
|
Vermont wrote
at 12:46 AM, Tuesday December 6, 2011 EST kdiceplaya, I actually agree that there shouldn't be much difference between 5/6/7. That being said, I think firsts should be heavily rewarded.
If you have a particular skill ranking, and then play one more game and win, your skill ranking should go up. TAZD is the only ranking system anyone promotes where you can get a win (a 1st) and your ranking can go down. It's patently nonsensical. |
|
|
Vermont wrote
at 1:10 AM, Tuesday December 6, 2011 EST chloe, get me your latest and I'll update the advisor blog entry.
|
|
skrumgaer wrote
at 6:54 AM, Tuesday December 6, 2011 EST No there are other systems under which a win can be marked as bad play. Like drawing to inside straights.
|
|
Shevar wrote
at 7:38 AM, Tuesday December 6, 2011 EST skrum, the problem is, you have no idea what good or bad play is in kdice. looking at your performance over the years, you obviously never figured out what a successful strategy is.
|
|
|
Vermont wrote
at 8:46 AM, Tuesday December 6, 2011 EST so skrum, when you get a win that makes your TAZD go up it indicates good skill, but getting a win that makes your TAZD go down is bad play on your part?
Pray tell, how does the TAZD measure this? lol. |
|
|
skrumgaer wrote
at 9:06 AM, Tuesday December 6, 2011 EST The point is that you can't evaluate a win in isolation without evaluating the whole situation in which the win occured.
Remember that both the TAPL and the TAZD are two-tailed tests. The TAPL rewarded good and "bad" skill equally. The TAZD, since it is measured against the datum of zero score players, gives much more emphasis to good skill than the TAPL, but it doesn't mean that some "bad" skill can't skip through. The TAZD is only as good as its zero datum, and the current zero datum has some skill content because the zero point pool has some skilled players who had a bad run of luck. Since we have a system of player levels now, it would be possible to remove from the zero score pools the players who have attained a particular level or higher. What level might be a good threshold? Level 10? Level 20? When the higher level players are removed, the zero datum could be recalculated and it might go something like 6.0, 6.4, etc instead of 7.2, 7.9 as it is now and it is less likely that a player would be on the "wrong" side of the TAZD. Shevar, I am having too much fun. Vflagging is disgusting, and I attack vflaggers as a matter of principle. I enjoy annoying the first place player in the game and double-basing players like Vermont. |
|
grandgnu wrote
at 9:17 AM, Tuesday December 6, 2011 EST Skrum, if Dottir can beat me in the rankings because she wants to play 600,000 games per year with under 60% 1st-3rds, then I'll stick with Chloes rankings which I'm also WINNING!
|
|
montecarlo wrote
at 9:19 AM, Tuesday December 6, 2011 EST now we go back to one of the original questions from long ago: what the fuck is "bad" skill? and why is it rewarded the same as "good" skill?
|
|
|
skrumgaer wrote
at 12:21 PM, Tuesday December 6, 2011 EST Gnu,
Then I guess you will have sucessfully gamed Chloe's system. |
|
|
skrumgaer wrote
at 12:27 PM, Tuesday December 6, 2011 EST "Bad" skill is non-random activity that does not pay off. The TAPL counts bad skill the same as good skill but because most people discontinue an activity that does not pay off the game count for bad skill is less than the game count for good skill so the bad skill players get left behind.
The TAZD much more strongly rewards skill that pays off than the TAPL does so it is much less likely that bad skill will advance in the TAZD rankings than in the TAPL rankings. |
