EPTProgamer Class Rankings - Page 4
| Forum Index > BW General |
|
Snare
Trinidad/Tobago129 Posts
| ||
|
Frits
11782 Posts
Also lol at one of the youngest players being the only senior master. | ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On November 29 2008 03:25 MoRe_mInErAls wrote: Isn't any ranking pointless? Why do we assign titles to chess players? It allows similar players to be grouped together is why.I think Hotbid knows what ELO is. He's saying the classes are completely pointless if you know how to read numbers | ||
|
NiGoL
1868 Posts
On November 29 2008 04:00 Plexa wrote: Isn't any ranking pointless? Why do we assign titles to chess players? It allows similar players to be grouped together is why. good question! | ||
|
simon311A
United States29 Posts
On November 29 2008 04:00 Plexa wrote: Isn't any ranking pointless? Why do we assign titles to chess players? It allows similar players to be grouped together is why. The ranking isn't pointless, the grouping is. It's like a teacher writing the following on the board for an unscaled test: 90-100 = A 80-89 = B . . Pretty pointless, though not as pointless as the kids yelling that their 75 was really an A but they were slumping during the test. | ||
|
Frits
11782 Posts
On November 29 2008 04:18 simon311A wrote: The ranking isn't pointless, the grouping is. It's like a teacher writing the following on the board for an unscaled test: 90-100 = A 80-89 = B . . Pretty pointless, though not as pointless as the kids yelling that their 75 was really an A but they were slumping during the test. It's not pointless otherwise they wouldn't do it on such a huge scale in school systems genius. It simplifies things, gives a better view on the whole, makes things easier for us to remember and understand. Things we have a better understanding of are way more likely to enter our long term memory. Just a number like 90-100 is pretty abstract, especially for kids. | ||
|
nemY
United States3119 Posts
 ToSsGirL an F? I mean come on. I know she aint the best looking korean girl out there, nor the brightest (she plays terran, not toss after all), but she certainly aint ugly you know? Not like GanZi ugly. Besides, Rekrul never sexed her, so I'd give her at least a C... seems fair to me yes? | ||
|
clazziquai
6685 Posts
On November 29 2008 04:35 nemY wrote: ToSsGirL an F? I mean come on. I know she aint the best looking korean girl out there, nor the brightest (she plays terran, not toss after all), but she certainly aint ugly you know? Not like GanZi ugly. Besides, Rekrul never sexed her, so I'd give her at least a C... seems fair to me yes?Tossgirl is SO overrated. Ugly as F | ||
|
myIRE
Belgium229 Posts
| ||
|
Frits
11782 Posts
On November 29 2008 07:07 myIRE wrote: she looks great wtf are you talking about -.- Congratulations, you have encountered a girl/guy posing as a girl on the internet! Please choose one of the following options: A) Reply with: "Damnit you guys she is so beautiful!! How dare you guys insult the way she looks!" aka the white knight B) Reply with: "She is way below my standards, what an ugly ho! I've turned down way hotter chicks than her!" aka the stereotypical nerd who has never talked to a girl C) Bonus option: Shrug it off and masturbate to porn. aka the other 99% Thank you for using the internet, have a pleasant day. | ||
|
InfeSteD
United States4658 Posts
bunch of bs starting with me and I still think the whole grouping thing is kinda like .... '' oO alright.. kool'' | ||
|
Avidkeystamper
United States8554 Posts
On November 29 2008 08:42 Frits wrote: Congratulations, you have encountered a girl/guy posing as a girl on the internet! Please choose one of the following options: A) Reply with: "Damnit you guys she is so beautiful!! How dare you guys insult the way she looks!" aka the white knight B) Reply with: "She is way below my standards, what an ugly ho! I've turned down way hotter chicks than her!" aka the stereotypical nerd who has never talked to a girl C) Bonus option: Shrug it off and masturbate to porn. aka the other 99% Thank you for using the internet, have a pleasant day. C, definitely. | ||
|
Racenilatr
United States2756 Posts
| ||
|
liosama
Australia843 Posts
| ||
|
AttackZerg
United States7454 Posts
Just another opinion of course, notice the 'I think'. I find rankings like this interesting as well, although I think each race should have its own criteria compared to itself. Meaning the value of the elo is adjusted for each race. I really thought Groups A and B for zerg were intersting, I had no clue savior's elo is higher then julyzergs, also looking at the lists like this makes sense to me. I enjoyed this, thanks op! | ||
|
Love.Zelduck
United States170 Posts
On November 27 2008 09:27 a bunch of people wrote: SPOILERS I did this when I was really bored. The clicking honestly gave me something to do. On November 28 2008 09:27 some TL failtards wrote: zomg my fav player is NOT Class D!!! read the intro paragraph. On November 29 2008 09:27 some others wrote: Waste of time, I know how to read a list of numbers. Congratulations, you just wasted even more time by posting. I purposely did this to waste time. Thank you, and good night. | ||
|
Guybrush
Spain4744 Posts
Thanks  | ||
|
gravity
Australia1969 Posts
On November 28 2008 23:49 Daigomi wrote: I can't believe people are giving the OP shit about this list, it's a great list that he just used to show some stats about current strengths. The basic idea is ok but 50 points is a pretty small difference (equivalent to a 57%-43% advantage for the stronger player). Realistically you can probably only group pros into 3-4 categories at most, rather than the 9 given here - the reason why chess has so many categories is because the rating system includes all competitive players, from the best pros to primary schoolers. The TLPD ratings only include full-time pros. | ||
cgrinker
United States3824 Posts
| ||
|
NeoMesh
Canada49 Posts
| ||
| ||
you can't be serious...
