Forum
Advisor Blog
Reviews
Strategies
Ideas
grandgnu, olkainry38, 1st.skyler win 2011 TAZD*
Posted By: Vermont at 10:34 AM, Thursday April 12, 2012 EDT
Here are some additional scoring systems to the TAZD, including TAZD*, ASRm, and ASR. They are all preferable to base TAZD because they reward skill rather than just deviance from a defined middle point.
Specifically, a win (first place) could actually make your TAZD score go DOWN. In all the other systems it would make your score increase (or stay the same due to rounding.)
There are other issues with the TAZD that have been hilighted in the forum numerous times already.
Kudos to chloe for pulling all this together and publishing all her formulae and results. Due to the shortcomings of the plain TAZD, part of what goes on needs to be kept secret, but it's not the case with these. Security through obscurity is not necessary.
Here's Chloe's 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.
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.
420 games minimum, 2400 games max bonus
Final standings, sorted by TAZD*:
ASRm ASR TAZD* Name
1.85 1096 28447 grandgnu
2.00 1639 23607 olkainry38
1.43 3465 22097 1st.skyler
1.46 2421 21374 Mercantile
1.31 2687 21307 kdiceplaya!
1.70 1719 19583 Mazaman
1.36 1653 19332 stakaboo
1.72 4303 19273 montecarlo
1.26 2474 18691 Lady Lite
1.72 0820 18559 masticore
1.40 8004 17820 Fonias
1.48 1136 17635 DrunkDaShiVa
1.26 3420 17021 Gurgi
1.29 3248 16598 dottir
1.22 1767 15354 cool g
0.89 2351 15331 chaiNblade
1.09 3709 14989 dirtyrolls
1.13 0534 14673 BAMMBI
1.38 2094 14563 Loobee
1.46 0493 14330 Xar
1.09 1609 14316 Az_Balu
1.26 1121 14285 ehervey
1.23 3678 13670 dasfury
1.23 1822 13631 charliedontsurf
1.14 1317 13372 Randomperfection
1.27 1219 13102 caesar-blue
0.63 -0030 12124 THRILLHO
1.18 0377 10911 Crazy Smurf
1.00 1082 10788 greekboi
1.07 0234 10059 ji-jo
1.13 0372 09926 TheBetterYodel
1.06 0396 09274 toad92
1.28 0089 08793 Kibble95
1.14 0068 07885 skrumgaer
1.01 -0205 07740 pooch723
1.02 0678 04874 Simon
0.93 -0041 04471 CCSKAOT
0.38 -0174 03302 joejoewhoa
http://bit.ly/v4mNPe
I got un-dumb and changed from manually summing products to using the SUMPRODUCT function in excel, but google docs apparently can't handle fixed references in its SUMPRODUCT calculation, hence the #VALUE! errors. Everything works fine in the original excel document, which I'd be happy to email to anyone who wants it.
Specifically, a win (first place) could actually make your TAZD score go DOWN. In all the other systems it would make your score increase (or stay the same due to rounding.)
There are other issues with the TAZD that have been hilighted in the forum numerous times already.
Kudos to chloe for pulling all this together and publishing all her formulae and results. Due to the shortcomings of the plain TAZD, part of what goes on needs to be kept secret, but it's not the case with these. Security through obscurity is not necessary.
Here's Chloe's 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.
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.
420 games minimum, 2400 games max bonus
Final standings, sorted by TAZD*:
ASRm ASR TAZD* Name
1.85 1096 28447 grandgnu
2.00 1639 23607 olkainry38
1.43 3465 22097 1st.skyler
1.46 2421 21374 Mercantile
1.31 2687 21307 kdiceplaya!
1.70 1719 19583 Mazaman
1.36 1653 19332 stakaboo
1.72 4303 19273 montecarlo
1.26 2474 18691 Lady Lite
1.72 0820 18559 masticore
1.40 8004 17820 Fonias
1.48 1136 17635 DrunkDaShiVa
1.26 3420 17021 Gurgi
1.29 3248 16598 dottir
1.22 1767 15354 cool g
0.89 2351 15331 chaiNblade
1.09 3709 14989 dirtyrolls
1.13 0534 14673 BAMMBI
1.38 2094 14563 Loobee
1.46 0493 14330 Xar
1.09 1609 14316 Az_Balu
1.26 1121 14285 ehervey
1.23 3678 13670 dasfury
1.23 1822 13631 charliedontsurf
1.14 1317 13372 Randomperfection
1.27 1219 13102 caesar-blue
0.63 -0030 12124 THRILLHO
1.18 0377 10911 Crazy Smurf
1.00 1082 10788 greekboi
1.07 0234 10059 ji-jo
1.13 0372 09926 TheBetterYodel
1.06 0396 09274 toad92
1.28 0089 08793 Kibble95
1.14 0068 07885 skrumgaer
1.01 -0205 07740 pooch723
1.02 0678 04874 Simon
0.93 -0041 04471 CCSKAOT
0.38 -0174 03302 joejoewhoa
http://bit.ly/v4mNPe
I got un-dumb and changed from manually summing products to using the SUMPRODUCT function in excel, but google docs apparently can't handle fixed references in its SUMPRODUCT calculation, hence the #VALUE! errors. Everything works fine in the original excel document, which I'd be happy to email to anyone who wants it.
|
grandgnu wrote
at 9:14 AM, Tuesday December 6, 2011 EST I should change my name to Charlie Sheen cause I'm WINNING!
|
|
THRILLHO wrote
at 3:53 PM, Tuesday December 6, 2011 EST Why aren't I on there? I don't understand it but I'm sure i joined it!
|
|
skrumgaer wrote
at 3:23 PM, Monday December 19, 2011 EST "Security through obscurity" is also employed by Ryan in his software that prevents selected pairs of players from sitting at the same table.
|
|
Vermont wrote
at 7:48 AM, Tuesday December 20, 2011 EST skrum, that's fantastic. Rather than the discuss the merits of your statistic (oh wait, you can't, because it's obviously flawed) you attempt to hide its flaws by pointing out that the same method is used by someone else somewhere else to hide something else.
This may be your weakest defense of TAZD yet. "Hey, I know I'm wrong, but look...that other guy, he tries to hide something the same way I do..." At the end of the day, the fact someone can get a win (1st) and have their TAZD go down is obviously, patently, irreconcilably stupid. |
|
|
skrumgaer wrote
at 8:58 AM, Tuesday December 20, 2011 EST No, it is your weakest offense against TAZD. You assume that TAZD is flawed, therefore "security through obscurity" is a flaw.
Try again. |
|
|
Vermont wrote
at 11:13 AM, Tuesday December 20, 2011 EST Actually, no one merely assumed the TAZD is flawed. Several people have presented various arguments, both theoretical and based on actual results, which highlight the problems. You can't actually refute the arguments so you tend to change the subject, compare unlike objects, or attempt to obfuscate the discussion.
The fact you have to secretly remove certain results from the TAZD because they point out how messed up it is only further demonstrates the weakness of the statistic. For the TAZD* everything is published and no secret intervention is required to hide its flaws. At the end of the day, the fact someone can get a win (1st) and have their TAZD go down is obviously, patently, irreconcilably stupid. |
|
|
skrumgaer wrote
at 12:46 PM, Tuesday December 20, 2011 EST I have a suggestion. Your argement from "security from obscurity" is foolish from the start, and my refutation of it makes you look even more foolish. But your original post is editable. So you can remove the "security from obscurity" reference from your post and you will not look foolish. On the other hand, the comments cannot be edited out. So if you leave the "security from obscurity" in, the readers will look for the refuatation and find it. If the "security from obscurity" is gone, the comments will just hang out there in space with nothing left to refer to.
|
|
superxchloe wrote
at 1:42 PM, Tuesday December 20, 2011 EST Verms, I also have a suggestion: stop arguing with skrum. It is entirely pointless. :)
Minimum games: 420 Max games bonus: 2400 TAZD* Name 27993 grandgnu 23607 olkainry38 22097 1st.skyler 21341 kdiceplaya! 21333 Mercantile 19369 stakaboo 19273 montecarlo 18919 Mazaman 18497 Lady Lite 18311 masticore 17890 Fonias 17635 DrunkDaShiVa 16959 Gurgi 16118 dottir 15354 cool g 15331 chaiNblade 15272 dirtyrolls 14666 BAMMBI 14503 Loobee 14330 Xar 14311 ehervey 14117 Az_Balu 13670 dasfury 13637 charliedontsurf 13240 Randomperfection 13102 caesar-blue 11537 THRILLHO 11023 greekboi 10911 Crazy Smurf 10059 ji-jo 09836 TheBetterYodel 09274 toad92 08773 Kibble95 07973 skrumgaer 07400 pooch723 04874 Simon 04034 CCSKAOT 03302 joejoewhoa http://bit.ly/vsfvRt I got un-dumb and changed from manually summing products to using the SUMPRODUCT function in excel, but google docs apparently can't handle fixed references in its SUMPRODUCT calculation, hence the #VALUE! errors. Everything works fine in the original excel document, which I'd be happy to email to anyone who wants it. |
|
|
superxchloe wrote
at 1:43 PM, Tuesday December 20, 2011 EST (What you currently have posted was mid-month competition. Sorry it wasn't clear that was NOT a mid-month annual update).
|
|
|
skrumgaer wrote
at 2:04 PM, Tuesday December 20, 2011 EST chloe:
What is the max games bonus? I have not heard of a bonus before. Is it something you get instead of credit for extra games if you max out on games? |
