![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
Posts: 42 ![]() ![]() Country : United States | PuzzleScott posted @ 2013-03-06 2:59 AM I just reported what happened. I used 'x' in my first nanro submission. It was rejected as wrong. I then changed all 'x's to 'X's and resubmitted. That was accepted. I later used 'x' in gap kakuro and it worked fine. Might different puzzles parse it differently? I agree 'x' should always work for 'X'. That's why I reported it. I don't have the info to know if this was a fluke or a (nanro only?) bug. | ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
Posts: 42 ![]() ![]() Country : United States | PuzzleScott posted @ 2013-03-06 8:57 AM It would be nice to have some way to start a new puzzle without having to wait an hour on an unsolved puzzle. I even tried to run up the clock with bad submissions, but the clock didn't jump. | ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Country : India | Administrator posted @ 2013-03-06 9:03 AM PuzzleScott - 2013-03-06 8:57 AM It would be nice to have some way to start a new puzzle without having to wait an hour on an unsolved puzzle. I even tried to run up the clock with bad submissions, but the clock didn't jump. We have reset your time in the db and you can skip Watches now and start any other puzzle. Just refresh the submission page. We'll probably add a "Skip" button next time | ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
Posts: 83 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Country : Czech Republic | Gotroch posted @ 2013-03-06 9:23 AM
| ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
Posts: 16 Country : India | witty posted @ 2013-03-06 10:42 AM Can the submission deadline be extended by a few days? | ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Country : India | Administrator posted @ 2013-03-06 10:48 AM witty - 2013-03-06 10:42 AM It is still open for 5 more days!Can the submission deadline be extended by a few days? | ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
Posts: 72 ![]() ![]() ![]() Country : South Korea | Joo M.Y posted @ 2013-03-06 4:09 PM
| ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
Posts: 20 ![]() Country : Romania | Rubben posted @ 2013-03-06 5:56 PM
| ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
Posts: 7 Country : United States | connect4 posted @ 2013-03-07 2:16 AM
| ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
Posts: 29 ![]() Country : United Kingdom | Nilz posted @ 2013-03-07 2:33 AM Para - 2013-03-03 11:31 PM Nilz - 2013-03-04 3:03 AM To elaborate on why I voted for it being a 'slightly unfair' scoring system: If I understand it correctly, there are bonus points for being the fastest solver of a puzzle? This is OK for some tests, but in my opinion this doesn't really make sense when combined with the other parts of the scoring system for this test- the winner gets most points anyway, they don't need any more. Imagine two people get identical times on most puzzles: except on puzzle X, person A beats B by 2 seconds, and they come 2nd and 3rd in the rankings. And on puzzle Y, person B beats A by 2 seconds, but they come first and second. In my view, they should tie overall, but if I understand the scoring for this test correctly, B will win, and I think this is slightly unfair. But apart from that, great test, great puzzles, looking forward to next year's marathon! ;-) Everyone who finishes within the alotted time gets bonus for rank, not just the fastest. So in your situation, B gets a bonus for 1st and 3rd, A gets bonus for finishing second twice. Ah, thanks, that makes a bit more sense. Still not sure I agree with the scoring system though; it means that the relative final positions of any two solvers may be affected by how a third, separate solver does, which seems a bit odd to me (see http://rangevoting.org/GutermanCHE.html for more about this phenomenom- particularly the paragraph about halfway down starting "A dramatic flaunting..."). But at least it does make sense! | ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
Posts: 315 ![]() ![]() ![]() Country : The Netherlands | Para posted @ 2013-03-07 3:16 AM Nilz - 2013-03-07 2:33 AM Para - 2013-03-03 11:31 PM Nilz - 2013-03-04 3:03 AM To elaborate on why I voted for it being a 'slightly unfair' scoring system: If I understand it correctly, there are bonus points for being the fastest solver of a puzzle? This is OK for some tests, but in my opinion this doesn't really make sense when combined with the other parts of the scoring system for this test- the winner gets most points anyway, they don't need any more. Imagine two people get identical times on most puzzles: except on puzzle X, person A beats B by 2 seconds, and they come 2nd and 3rd in the rankings. And on puzzle Y, person B beats A by 2 seconds, but they come first and second. In my view, they should tie overall, but if I understand the scoring for this test correctly, B will win, and I think this is slightly unfair. But apart from that, great test, great puzzles, looking forward to next year's marathon! ;-) Everyone who finishes within the alotted time gets bonus for rank, not just the fastest. So in your situation, B gets a bonus for 1st and 3rd, A gets bonus for finishing second twice. Ah, thanks, that makes a bit more sense. Still not sure I agree with the scoring system though; it means that the relative final positions of any two solvers may be affected by how a third, separate solver does, which seems a bit odd to me (see http://rangevoting.org/GutermanCHE.html for more about this phenomenom- particularly the paragraph about halfway down starting "A dramatic flaunting..."). But at least it does make sense! The ranking system last year was purely based on time left to solve. Just as this year, the worst solves are discarded. But this caused a problem because not all puzzles are the same difficulty and take the same average or fastest time to solve. This caused for most people last year to have the same puzzle discarded, even if their relative performance was really good compared to others. As the same time on different puzzles might not actually be equally good, it was suggested the scoring system could be improved. So that's why there was a discussion on how to make it fairer, to rank players for each puzzle on their relative performance in each puzzle, instead of their purely time related performance. This eventually led to a bonus system that is similar to the LMI rankings, where each test is scored relatively to the performance of the best solver. In this test instead of top score and ranking, there are fastest time and ranking. And all solvers who finish a puzzle fast enough to qualify for a bonus are included in this calculation. I'm not saying this is a perfect scoring system, but it's fairer than last year's. And if you have any suggestions on what you think might be a better way, I think they are always welcome. There's always room for discussion here. Edited by Para 2013-03-07 3:17 AM | ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
Posts: 29 ![]() Country : United Kingdom | Nilz posted @ 2013-03-07 3:57 AM Para - 2013-03-06 11:16 PM Nilz - 2013-03-07 2:33 AM Para - 2013-03-03 11:31 PM Nilz - 2013-03-04 3:03 AM To elaborate on why I voted for it being a 'slightly unfair' scoring system: If I understand it correctly, there are bonus points for being the fastest solver of a puzzle? This is OK for some tests, but in my opinion this doesn't really make sense when combined with the other parts of the scoring system for this test- the winner gets most points anyway, they don't need any more. Imagine two people get identical times on most puzzles: except on puzzle X, person A beats B by 2 seconds, and they come 2nd and 3rd in the rankings. And on puzzle Y, person B beats A by 2 seconds, but they come first and second. In my view, they should tie overall, but if I understand the scoring for this test correctly, B will win, and I think this is slightly unfair. But apart from that, great test, great puzzles, looking forward to next year's marathon! ;-) Everyone who finishes within the alotted time gets bonus for rank, not just the fastest. So in your situation, B gets a bonus for 1st and 3rd, A gets bonus for finishing second twice. Ah, thanks, that makes a bit more sense. Still not sure I agree with the scoring system though; it means that the relative final positions of any two solvers may be affected by how a third, separate solver does, which seems a bit odd to me (see http://rangevoting.org/GutermanCHE.html for more about this phenomenom- particularly the paragraph about halfway down starting "A dramatic flaunting..."). But at least it does make sense! The ranking system last year was purely based on time left to solve. Just as this year, the worst solves are discarded. But this caused a problem because not all puzzles are the same difficulty and take the same average or fastest time to solve. This caused for most people last year to have the same puzzle discarded, even if their relative performance was really good compared to others. As the same time on different puzzles might not actually be equally good, it was suggested the scoring system could be improved. So that's why there was a discussion on how to make it fairer, to rank players for each puzzle on their relative performance in each puzzle, instead of their purely time related performance. This eventually led to a bonus system that is similar to the LMI rankings, where each test is scored relatively to the performance of the best solver. In this test instead of top score and ranking, there are fastest time and ranking. And all solvers who finish a puzzle fast enough to qualify for a bonus are included in this calculation. I'm not saying this is a perfect scoring system, but it's fairer than last year's. And if you have any suggestions on what you think might be a better way, I think they are always welcome. There's always room for discussion here. Yes, I remember that discussion, and I agree that this year's is fairer, so I'm certainly not complaining, and I hope it doesn't seem that I am! It's not perfect, but no system would be. And it does have the advantage of being fairly easy to understand (unless you're a muppet like me who misreads the method! ![]() It seemed to me that there were no puzzles this year that were outliers and were 'significantly' harder than the rest (unlike last year), so last year's scoring system would've worked OK, but I still think this is better- just not perfect! ![]() | ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
Posts: 3 Country : Japan | nyoroppyi posted @ 2013-03-07 3:23 PM
| ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Country : India | Administrator posted @ 2013-03-07 7:41 PM The score page is now handling penalties properly. As you already have found out, you can see puzzles which you have submitted correctly. This means if you have not submitted all 12 puzzles, your rank will go down (even if the competition ends now). | ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Country : India | Administrator posted @ 2013-03-07 7:50 PM Couldn't help, but share how we have 3 winners now ( 1st table - after all 12 puzzles 2nd table - this is how the score page looks to EKBM who has finished just 2 3rd table - this is how the score page looks to sai who has finished just 2 ) ![]() | ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
An LMI player | An LMI player posted @ 2013-03-08 12:13 AM
| ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
Posts: 8 Country : Czech Republic | jhrdina posted @ 2013-03-08 3:33 AM
The scoring is a little unfair in the respect that the most difficult puzzles have the least effect on scoring. They take too much time and bring too little bonus. It would be better to calculate bonus points against an average or median of times of the solvers. | ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
Posts: 315 ![]() ![]() ![]() Country : The Netherlands | Para posted @ 2013-03-08 4:34 AM jhrdina - 2013-03-08 3:33 AM The scoring is a little unfair in the respect that the most difficult puzzles have the least effect on scoring. They take too much time and bring too little bonus. It would be better to calculate bonus points against an average or median of times of the solvers. Isn't that what happens now? Every puzzle, no matter what the fastest solving time has the same bonus for the fastest solver. So every puzzle has the same range of bonus. If you mean, the mean of all solvers, even the ones taking more than an hour, then it would severely alter the test structure. the idea of the one hour bonus cutoff point is so people can stop solving and don't have to keep solving for hours if they can't finish it as otherwise they'd lose loads of points. | ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
An LMI player | An LMI player posted @ 2013-03-08 8:42 AM
| ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
An LMI player | An LMI player posted @ 2013-03-08 9:53 AM
| ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
Posts: 11 Country : Bulgaria | zorko posted @ 2013-03-09 12:53 AM
| ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
Posts: 10 Country : India | keshava.hs posted @ 2013-03-09 1:21 AM not getting marks for Maxi loop, please have a look | ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
An LMI player | An LMI player posted @ 2013-03-09 1:40 AM
For people like me, it would be nice to get bonus points for a longer period than 60 minutes. Because often puzzles need just some more than 60 minutes (that was for several puzzles this time), and this is worth just the same as working hours or days solving them. But nevertheless I enjoyed the contest very much, and it was hard to choose the 3 "best" puzzles, for they were all beautiful! | ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
An LMI player | An LMI player posted @ 2013-03-09 2:38 PM
| ||||||||||||||||||
![]() | |||||||||||||||||||
Posts: 774 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Country : India | rakesh_rai posted @ 2013-03-09 3:24 PM
|