|
MU stats for the OGN-prelim
ZvP: 20-12
TvZ: 27-14
PvT: 19-12
Last time maps were RoV, Luna and Rush Hour 2, and
MU results after 20 groups and both playoffs & Dual groups: 28-7 ZvP 30-28(OMG BALANCE!!) TvZ 21-11 PvT
So compared to this prelim ZvP has leaned more towards balanced while the TvZ MU has gone notable much in Terrans favour. This can be explained by the maps for this prelim which were Sin Pioneering Period, 815 III, and Rush Hour 3.
Rush Hour 3 is basically same as Rush Hour 2, and produced most likely same results, but the two other maps are very hard ZvT(much harder than Luna&RoV), and easier PvZ than Luna and RoV. Wait WTF ? That can't be. Luna and RoV are statistically better balanced maps, however these statistics show otherwise. I'd explain it with many of the good Zergs being among the extra 8 that qualified for last OSL(Shinhwa, JJu, Yellow[Name] etc). However I dont think that perfectly justifies the fact that Protoss have performed so much better against Zerg in this prelim. Im quite positive the maps are better PvZ, especially 815.
PvT is basically unchanged, slightly better for Terran. Luna and RoV are about equally as hard TvP as 815 and Pioneering Period though. Especially on the latter mentioned, T>P after early game(in which P>T) if positions are close due to fast push. 815 is slightly harder TvP than Luna&RoV.
|
so when it's gonna start??
|
lool oov's group is a joke
|
Hahahaha... Did Reach fail even in offline qualifier ???
|
Sin Pioneering Period is really bad for PvZ...just really bad. 815 can be okay, depending on who the toss is and who the zerg is.Edit: what I mean by that is that certain styles PvZ are very effective on 815 and those toss players do well...other styles are not so effective and players who can't adapt to more effective styles won't do well.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On June 29 2006 19:55 Guybrush wrote:
MU stats for the OGN-prelim
ZvP: 20-12
TvZ: 27-14
PvT: 19-12
Last time maps were RoV, Luna and Rush Hour 2, and
MU results after 20 groups and both playoffs & Dual groups: 28-7 ZvP 30-28(OMG BALANCE!!) TvZ 21-11 PvT
So compared to this prelim ZvP has leaned more towards balanced while the TvZ MU has gone notable much in Terrans favour. This can be explained by the maps for this prelim which were Sin Pioneering Period, 815 III, and Rush Hour 3.
Rush Hour 3 is basically same as Rush Hour 2, and produced most likely same results, but the two other maps are very hard ZvT(much harder than Luna&RoV), and easier PvZ than Luna and RoV. Wait WTF ? That can't be. Luna and RoV are statistically better balanced maps, however these statistics show otherwise. I'd explain it with many of the good Zergs being among the extra 8 that qualified for last OSL(Shinhwa, JJu, Yellow[Name] etc). However I dont think that perfectly justifies the fact that Protoss have performed so much better against Zerg in this prelim. Im quite positive the maps are better PvZ, especially 815.
PvT is basically unchanged, slightly better for Terran. Luna and RoV are about equally as hard TvP as 815 and Pioneering Period though. Especially on the latter mentioned, T>P after early game(in which P>T) if positions are close due to fast push. 815 is slightly harder TvP than Luna&RoV.
Ehm, Pioneering and 815 are much harder - overall - than luna rov for terrans in PvT;;
Pioneering is much harder PvZ than either map last time around. 815 and Rush Hour 3 are both pretty balanced, especially RH3.
I dunno, guess it just goes to show how little the stats really mean - just depends on who is having a good day and who is not?
|
They mean quite a bit really, but you need to consider a fairly large sample. There are 3 maps, 32 games ZvP, 41 games TvZ and 31 games PvT. All of these samples are small enough that if we compared them to the statistical mean values taken over all professional games played (all stats ZvP, all stats TvZ, all stats PvT), then we need to use Student's T-distribution, which gives us a much thicker tailed curve than a normal distribution.
If we wish to consider the balance of each map, then we're talking about an average of 11 games per map in ZvP and, 10 per map in PvT, and about 14 games per map in TvZ. The lower the sample, the "broader" our statistical distribution, so we begin to lose the accuracy of statistics as a predictor.
And this kind of naive understanding of the statistics still doesn't account for factors such as the unusually high percentage of Zergs who made it past the prelims before (so the average skill of the Zergs in the prelim rounds this time is somewhat weaker than it was before), or the random factors of how players are paired up, or the random factors of how a player is doing on a given day (which we can essentially consider as white noise).
|
Time for the OGN curse to wear off. Anytime and Nada will come back and own shit up
|
On June 30 2006 10:12 Mortality wrote:
They mean quite a bit really, but you need to consider a fairly large sample. There are 3 maps, 32 games ZvP, 41 games TvZ and 31 games PvT. All of these samples are small enough that if we compared them to the statistical mean values taken over all professional games played (all stats ZvP, all stats TvZ, all stats PvT), then we need to use Student's T-distribution, which gives us a much thicker tailed curve than a normal distribution.
If we wish to consider the balance of each map, then we're talking about an average of 11 games per map in ZvP and, 10 per map in PvT, and about 14 games per map in TvZ. The lower the sample, the "broader" our statistical distribution, so we begin to lose the accuracy of statistics as a predictor.
And this kind of naive understanding of the statistics still doesn't account for factors such as the unusually high percentage of Zergs who made it past the prelims before (so the average skill of the Zergs in the prelim rounds this time is somewhat weaker than it was before), or the random factors of how players are paired up, or the random factors of how a player is doing on a given day (which we can essentially consider as white noise).
i cant tell if you're arguing for or against stats. but no, theres far too many things beyond map balance affecting the outcomes of the games for stats to be given much attention until many games are played on it.
|
On July 01 2006 10:52 HungZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2006 10:12 Mortality wrote:
They mean quite a bit really, but you need to consider a fairly large sample. There are 3 maps, 32 games ZvP, 41 games TvZ and 31 games PvT. All of these samples are small enough that if we compared them to the statistical mean values taken over all professional games played (all stats ZvP, all stats TvZ, all stats PvT), then we need to use Student's T-distribution, which gives us a much thicker tailed curve than a normal distribution.
If we wish to consider the balance of each map, then we're talking about an average of 11 games per map in ZvP and, 10 per map in PvT, and about 14 games per map in TvZ. The lower the sample, the "broader" our statistical distribution, so we begin to lose the accuracy of statistics as a predictor.
And this kind of naive understanding of the statistics still doesn't account for factors such as the unusually high percentage of Zergs who made it past the prelims before (so the average skill of the Zergs in the prelim rounds this time is somewhat weaker than it was before), or the random factors of how players are paired up, or the random factors of how a player is doing on a given day (which we can essentially consider as white noise). i cant tell if you're arguing for or against stats. but no, theres far too many things beyond map balance affecting the outcomes of the games for stats to be given much attention until many games are played on it.
I'm entirely for statistics, but statistics must be used properly. The stats here do correlate with map balance, but you have to be careful in how you look at them. Firstly, it must be recognized that the "true" win average in say, ZvP is not necessarily even close to 20-12. The more games that are played, the greater the certainty that we have. With 32 games played, it is pretty safe to say that these maps favor Zerg over Protoss, however, since only 32 games have been played, the maps could favor Zerg strongly, or only slightly -- we don't know. Also, we have to watch out for confounding variables (such as in line with what I was saying earlier, an unusually large group of Zergs made it into OSL and lasted fairly long, so the average skill of the Zergs in lower levels of qualifying rounds has decreased since last season).
So in short, yes the stats here correspond to the balance of the maps, but no, we cannot make statements any more aggressive than that until more games have been played.
|
Hong Kong20321 Posts
|
Dates on any of these matches??
|
Live2Win
United States6657 Posts
Dates updated.
Group A starts next monday.
|
I think there's a mistake in the dates
Group D: 7/36 (Wed)
wtf? 
|
|
|
NaDa and July Fighting!!
now That would be a final! =)
|
|
|
Well, seeing how I forgot about this thread until I saw it just now, we could close my thread and keep this one going. Live2Win just needs to know that iStation is sponsoring this ODT.
|
When does it start? 19:00 KOR time?
OK, I got it, 6:30 PM KOR time.
|
11:30cet
18:30kor
2:30tl.net
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
