![]() | |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Country : India | debmohanty posted @ 2012-02-05 12:10 PM Fully agree with Melon's list, especially point 3 MellowMelon - 2012-02-05 6:00 AM 3. Being able to set a hard cutoff for no bonus (60 minutes here) so solvers that want to be competitive don't have to set aside an indeterminate amount of time to do each puzzle. While we are trying to design a robust system that determines the relative scores / ranks at the top accurately and fairly, it is equally important to keep most other players in mind. In my view, the 60 minutes cut off for each puzzle in this test has been a key parameter for the success of this test. I would always vote for something that a player knows as his target, rather than bonus for top-50 or bonus based on n*top player's time which players don't know when they start solving. motris' rank2.xlsx captures all the points logically and can be used in future marathons. It might sound complicated when someone reads first time, but for those who are not interested in details, it simply means "you get bonus if you solve within 60 minutes". Yes, Samurai sort of breaks the scoring. But it is part of organizers' responsibility to have puzzles based on the scoring system in place. |
![]() | |
Posts: 315 ![]() ![]() ![]() Country : The Netherlands | Para posted @ 2012-02-05 5:16 PM I guess this system solves many scoring ambiguities. I think the only scenario that is not captured is a TVC V like scenario, where one player is far superior than the rest. Isn't it possible to implement a system that is similar to the LMI Ranking score. There part of the rating is based on ranking and part on actual score, with the top score being 1000. So a system based part on ranking and part of actual time, where the fastest time is a set bonus and 60 minutes is 0 bonus and the rest is scaled. I think the most annoying part of these grading systems is that you have no clue how you stand opposed to others when you're done solving and your relative rank will shift constantly. You can be ahead of someone when you're done solving and behind them when the test ends. This will especially affect people in the middle I think. I assume there's people in the middle who will try competing against eachother a bit too and they will have no clue if they beat their friend in this test or not till days after they are done. At least I always like to see how I have done against players who are close to me on the LMI rank when i'm done solving. Edited by Para 2012-02-05 5:17 PM |
![]() | |
Posts: 66 ![]() ![]() ![]() Country : Hungary | Valezius posted @ 2012-02-05 5:53 PM motris - 2012-02-05 3:22 AM I've now gone ahead and played with the scoring model and tried the 150 for 1st, 149 for 2nd, 148 for 3rd, down to 100 for 51st through last finisher. I dont think this system is too fair if somebody win a round with 6 minutes apart ;) I propose that first position is 50 points bonus, and this is the base of the calculation of bonus points/minute. For instance if the first's solving time 10 minutes then every minute is 1 point. If the solving time 15 minutes then 50/45=1,11 So if the puzzle is too easy the bonus will be lower than 1, but in generally it will be higher than 1, in extreme cases it can be almost 2. Every player still know that if he solves the puzzle within one hour, he gets bonus (and the bonus will be 1-1.5 in most cases). |
![]() | |
Posts: 170 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Country : Germany | rob posted @ 2012-02-05 7:25 PM Regarding the Different Neighbours puzzle, it's also doable if you miss the uniqueness (I did). I've recorded a possible start . The notes are kind of hard to make out, but you should be able to follow the solve. |
![]() | |
Posts: 1800 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Country : India | prasanna16391 posted @ 2012-02-05 9:27 PM In all my struggles with the Different Neighbors puzzle(I took a certain part as correct which was wrong and kept thinking the mistake is elsewhere), I found about 3-4 openings of different complexities. The easiest one is what Deb mentioned but there are other tricks there. I guess if one wants to stare at it and start over about 5 times like I ended up doing, they'll find all of them :\ |
![]() | |
Posts: 199 ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Country : United States | motris posted @ 2012-02-05 11:07 PM Para - 2012-02-05 4:16 AM] Isn't it possible to implement a system that is similar to the LMI Ranking score. Yes, and I think you've given a great idea for how this system would look, with half of bonus scaling by time and half being flat based on rank. That seems perfectly appropriate for an LMI test comparing 10 puzzles just as it works over the year for comparing 10 LMI tests with each other. Of course, all systems have problems. The scoring of the Marathon test is a huge outlier compared to the normal monthly tests with time bonus, so it is not a good test for the overall rankings as it raises almost everyone more than usual. In this test, the scoring of three of the puzzles led to much less bonus than the other seven. So we are proposing possibilities to address these issues. I don't think there is any dominant answer here, but there are better and worse approaches and it is good to hear from many solvers and aim for better next time. Para - 2012-02-05 4:16 AM] I think the most annoying part of these grading systems is that you have no clue how you stand opposed to others when you're done solving and your relative rank will shift constantly. Well, this is sort of a problem on all tests (as your rank will only ever fall) but with variable scoring there could indeed be small rank changes when solvers are at values where they are "effectively tied". I don't think anyone can cleanly claim victory when things are this close (like when I beat Ulrich by 1 second!) but the rank score will eventually favor one over the other. My sense though is that these effects will be rather small, as they were during Puzzle Jackpot when final scoring wasn't known until all solvers had completed. I could do subsampling analysis to be sure, but I think using rank and not time you will have greater stability. And until results are finalized, you can always just use relative performance for "bragging rights". "I beat you on 6 of 10 puzzles!" "Yes, but I beat you by 5 minutes overall!" Like many things in sports, there aren't always winners but there is always debate. |
![]() | |
Posts: 10 Country : Australia | reesylou posted @ 2012-02-08 5:44 PM rob - 2012-02-06 12:25 AM Regarding the Different Neighbours puzzle, it's also doable if you miss the uniqueness (I did). I've recorded a possible start . The notes are kind of hard to make out, but you should be able to follow the solve. Wow. Thanks for that video... I now have a better understanding of how to make limiting assumptions on possibilities. Seeing the thought process unfold just made it click :) |
![]() | |
Posts: 2 Country : India | poonamc306 posted @ 2012-12-28 3:39 PM Really this is looking interesting. I have never seen such kind of game. I would like to participate in this amazing and different game. I like such kind of things really. And i think this would be knowledgeable. So any one can tell me how i can be the part of this game. |