|
|
Dotabuff tried that and got shut down by valve lol.
|
On December 06 2013 06:17 devilesk wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2013 06:11 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 06:05 SKC wrote:On December 06 2013 06:02 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 05:54 SKC wrote:On December 06 2013 05:53 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 05:47 SKC wrote:On December 06 2013 05:45 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 05:39 SKC wrote:On December 06 2013 05:36 hariooo wrote:
[quote]
Bulldog queues pubs with Sheever a lot. This particular example isn't too surprising. The fact he queues with someone doesn't really change how good of a player he is. It means the average MMR of all players in those games are going to be lower than if he was solo q'ing. DSR is to some significant extent (from the creator's mouth) based off that value. I can't imagine Bulldog going EE-levels of tryhard in those kinds of games either, so it shouldn't shock anyone that he might have a lower DSR compared to pubstars. 2GD is a pubstar? Just because Admiral Bulldogs MMR is lower than it could be doesn't mean he should be that low. They also don't queue exclusivelly with each other. 2GD has even talked about how his games are very diferent when he doesn't stack with Draskyl. His MMR isn't that high at all. Right but MMR and DSR are different measures and not directly comparable as far as I know. If 2GD frequently stacks with people of higher MMR than him and Bulldog frequently stacks with people of lower MMR than him, this is an explanation for the difference in DSR's. Oh, sure, that could definatelly be the reason why they are diferent. Which is also why Dota Skill Rating is a shit Skill Rating if it doesn't rate skill. I don't think anyone is arguing MMR and DSR are not very diferent from each other. At least this is more debatable. Think about if LeBron James only played street ball with his friends. He's undoubtedly really good, but it's near impossible to determine his full skill potential at pro level using any rating system. It sounds like DSR is only valid for solo q'd games. This can be a weakness of course, or you could just consider that its results are only valid under certain circumstances. I don't see how useful a stat that only works in circumstances that don't exist can be. Almost noone plays solo queue exclusivelly, and the website is definatelly not making the distinction. It just means the currest rating is useless. And that's giving the benefit of the doubt that it would actually work in this imaginary scenario. There's been enough evidence (DSR predicting wins at high percent is the big one) that I believe DSR works in the optimal scenario (solo Q for last 20 games against other solo q'ers). The fact that it loses a lot of its accuracy under suboptimal conditions is certainly a disadvantage. It's the most legitimate complaint I've heard against it all thread. How is 65% high? Flipping a coin already gets you 50%. We have no other data to compare it to. How does DSR fare compared to other basic stats with respect to predicting game outcomes? Basically you and the creator claim that 65% is statistically significant. I haven't seen any actual reason as to why it is.
Blackjack is 51%. But we don't call it a fair game at all. It's certainly not a coin flip.
Another example. It takes less than 40 coin flips to determine that, if you get 65% heads using that 40 sample size, you can be 95% confident that the coin was not a fair 50/50 coin. I will give you the formula to determine this if you ask. So what this means is that if he even used just a couple hundred games to test DSR's prediction rate, he can be very certain statistically that DSR is predicting games because something is correlating it with victories versus it just being a random guess (where you would expect close to 50% prediction rate).
|
On December 06 2013 06:20 devilesk wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2013 06:15 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 06:10 devilesk wrote:On December 06 2013 06:00 Milkis wrote:On December 06 2013 05:58 devilesk wrote:On December 06 2013 05:50 Milkis wrote:
I don't really want to go through all that PHP but it seems like the general idea was to train a bunch of data to get stuff like kda/xpm/gpm and such for every hero and judged you by the performance of those statistics per hero. That would be my guess. This is why he can get away with "20 games" for that reason.
I think such a methodology can work very well to rate players but I don't think how he's accomplishing is the best way ever. There's a lot of issues with such a system too that I wonder if it was addressed (I don't really want to read that code). But it's really not difficult to think which ones work or not.
One more thing is that every rating system has anomalies -- I mean, not everyone tryhard ladders every game and I think things like that affect your rating probably. No, he might train with all that data, but ultimately the question he's trying to solve with his model is whether a game is "pro-level" or "normal". From his training, he can "graph" a surface that represents the baseline between pro and normal. Anything below the surface is normal and anything above it is pro. He's using the distance from that surface as the metric for generating his rating, which is I believe a point of contention for people knowledgeable about SVM (I am not), because it seems like the model's simple purpose is just to make that binary decision. Yeah I'm definitely not defending how he implemented it -- I'd have approached it very differently. There's a lot to criticize on the implementation, but the idea itself isn't without merit IMO Like I think if he just looked at stuff like CS, game length, etc, to control for that he'd have a much stronger rating. But I agree that doing that based on just one GPM/XPM/KDA estimate per a single hero isn't the best idea ever. My problem isn't with what variables he's taking into account. My problem is with the question his model is trying to answer and how I don't see how it's even good for basing a rating system off of. So he's trying to classify games as in pro bracket or non pro bracket. Suppose he can actually do this perfectly, taking into account every stat imaginable. So now I can tell you that 0 out of your 500 games were played at a "pro level". What good is that metric, especially if 90% of everyone else has the same result? Even if the two brackets were distributed evenly, so then 250 out of your 500 games were played at a "pro level" how do you create a rating out of that? Since Valve MM matches people based on a continous scale, there's more than just "pro" and "normal" bracket. I can say things like this match in the 99th percentile of matches based on the average Elo in the game, or it was played at the 5th percentile. The only thing you can do with the metric this guy is measuring is say, this match was played in "pro bracket" or this match was played in "normal bracket" I'll give you a really simplistic example of how this can work. Let's say you flip a coin. Heads is "pro" bracket. Tails is the opposite. If you flip this coin many times and find that 80% of these flips are heads versus the 40% heads that your friend is flipping, this is something you can compare. Many people can do this and the distribution of what percentage heads you get will form a continuous distribution even though you originally started with only two possibilities. So suddenly you can start matchmaking your 80% against other people with close to 80% ratios. You're assuming people juggle back and forth between the two brackets. Realistically, if your cutoff is "pro level" for a game how many people are even going to play one game at pro level? Basically, an equivalent metric would be a rating based off how many times you've played with or against Dendi.
To explain the algorithm to the level you want me to requires expertise on the subject that neither of us have. I'm just saying your initial argument is flawed. The explanation I already gave is close enough on a conceptual level.
By the way, back before this was changed, the proportion of your games in normal, high, and very high would have correlated very strongly with your actual MMR>
|
ya which dotabuff did very well and pretty accurately #bringbackdbr
|
Just wait 1 or 2 weeks, if it is somewhat legit Valve will shut it down. And if they don't bother to do that then it is as useless as it seems to be
|
On December 06 2013 06:21 Erasme wrote:
A simple ELO system would work much better. Basically like the one in LoL
You would need a complete data set for that, however.
I think.
|
wow.... i have never seen milkis posting here or on TL recently :D.... Nice seeing you again. Now i tell for sure that its not you who killed of wax and pretending to be him.
|
How do we even know that 65% thing is even legit? It'd be great if it was but I doubt it. The author also said stuff like wards bought by supperts counting and not playing selfishly etc when, from the leaked code we can actually see it's nothing like that. It's probably all for more ad money, and it's continuing to pile up, or will once he gets the site up again, if he even does that.
|
On December 06 2013 06:34 Incze wrote:
How do we even know that 65% thing is even legit? It'd be great if it was but I doubt it. The author also said stuff like wards bought by supperts counting and not playing selfishly etc when, from the leaked code we can actually see it's nothing like that. It's probably all for more ad money, and it's continuing to pile up, or will once he gets the site up again, if he even does that.
Shhhhh you might pop hariooo's bubble.
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
its not legit, its made up
|
On December 06 2013 06:17 devilesk wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2013 06:11 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 06:05 SKC wrote:On December 06 2013 06:02 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 05:54 SKC wrote:On December 06 2013 05:53 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 05:47 SKC wrote:On December 06 2013 05:45 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 05:39 SKC wrote:On December 06 2013 05:36 hariooo wrote:
[quote]
Bulldog queues pubs with Sheever a lot. This particular example isn't too surprising. The fact he queues with someone doesn't really change how good of a player he is. It means the average MMR of all players in those games are going to be lower than if he was solo q'ing. DSR is to some significant extent (from the creator's mouth) based off that value. I can't imagine Bulldog going EE-levels of tryhard in those kinds of games either, so it shouldn't shock anyone that he might have a lower DSR compared to pubstars. 2GD is a pubstar? Just because Admiral Bulldogs MMR is lower than it could be doesn't mean he should be that low. They also don't queue exclusivelly with each other. 2GD has even talked about how his games are very diferent when he doesn't stack with Draskyl. His MMR isn't that high at all. Right but MMR and DSR are different measures and not directly comparable as far as I know. If 2GD frequently stacks with people of higher MMR than him and Bulldog frequently stacks with people of lower MMR than him, this is an explanation for the difference in DSR's. Oh, sure, that could definatelly be the reason why they are diferent. Which is also why Dota Skill Rating is a shit Skill Rating if it doesn't rate skill. I don't think anyone is arguing MMR and DSR are not very diferent from each other. At least this is more debatable. Think about if LeBron James only played street ball with his friends. He's undoubtedly really good, but it's near impossible to determine his full skill potential at pro level using any rating system. It sounds like DSR is only valid for solo q'd games. This can be a weakness of course, or you could just consider that its results are only valid under certain circumstances. I don't see how useful a stat that only works in circumstances that don't exist can be. Almost noone plays solo queue exclusivelly, and the website is definatelly not making the distinction. It just means the currest rating is useless. And that's giving the benefit of the doubt that it would actually work in this imaginary scenario. There's been enough evidence (DSR predicting wins at high percent is the big one) that I believe DSR works in the optimal scenario (solo Q for last 20 games against other solo q'ers). The fact that it loses a lot of its accuracy under suboptimal conditions is certainly a disadvantage. It's the most legitimate complaint I've heard against it all thread. How is 65% high? Flipping a coin already gets you 50%. We have no other data to compare it to. How does DSR fare compared to other basic stats with respect to predicting game outcomes? Basically you and the creator claim that 65% is statistically significant. I haven't seen any actual reason as to why it is.
Nobody laughs at my ass joke that i posted earlier 
On December 05 2013 21:34 BurningSera wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 05 2013 19:01 hariooo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2013 18:45 BurningSera wrote:On December 05 2013 17:58 hariooo wrote:On December 05 2013 17:42 BurningSera wrote:On December 05 2013 17:08 hariooo wrote:On December 05 2013 15:44 njt7 wrote:
The only way to comparatively use DSR effectively is against yourself for later references. Comparing against others wont give you anything good. And the site is still in massive beta from the looks of it so your DSR number might change just for the worst just from patching.
The developer seems decent so in the future it might be useful but all of these different rating numbers is usually worthless for self improvement its dangerous to get caught in pointless ego boosting. If people actually want to improve their play they should watch their own replays and analyze as well as watching specific heroes/roles played by the best(pros) and try to emulate. Most important is probably to try to find people to play with/ against who is already better then you.
Not sure why I went on this rant but Im getting tired of this DSR/Dotabuff mania going on. Of course you can compare it to other people. It's also the whole basis of why DSR can predict the winner of a game. On December 05 2013 15:48 Staboteur wrote:On December 05 2013 15:21 FakeDeath wrote:
So I just tried out this mydotaskill.com thing everyone is talking about.
My DSR is 954 Emerald whatever that means.
Can this be taken as a legit base line of your skill level?
Not like a true indicator but more of where u stand in the dota ladder?
Though I wonder how they actually calculated your DSR.
What is the difference between this and Valve internal rating? DSR's gone through 3 or so iterations where they adjust the algorithms to produce new and exciting numbers that may or may not mean a damn thing to anyone at all. They're not a good indicator of skill. By the site's only admission, it is only able to predict the winner of any given game correctly 65% of the time. Seeing as that's only 15% better than a blind guess over many iterations, I'd say it is still pretty damn inaccurate. People who don't have a background in statistics need to stop saying things like this. 65% prediction accuracy over a large sample is RIDICULOUS and if that 65% is proven to be true it is clearly evidence of DSR's accuracy. It would be a statistical fact except people who don't study stats can't be convinced because they can't understand the proof. I dont think any of that matters when most of the player profile is set to be hidden by default. Meanwhile, Player number 34176943 DSR is: 1275 This player has a Pro DSR score (top 0,5%). >_> and my smurf now is 460. I am entertained enough by now, that will be the last time i visit the site. and i fcking respect the people behind dotabuff now. http://www.reddit.com/r/DotA2/comments/1s4ezx/mydotaskillcom_and_why_it_should_be_ignored/cdtubbcHidden profiles shouldn't matter. Yes it does very much so matters, unless some people just wanted a number to say something meaningless about their skill/ranking then it shouldn't matter to them i guess (or anything matters to them in that case, hence the ridiculous ranking from the website). You can talk about fancy stats techniques etc but in the end of day I hope people know that the site is a joke lol (a bigger joke than DBR if you must, and i actually respect the stats guys behind dotabuff now because they actually have the self-respect and morale as some statisticians. say 1000 out of 100000 players are actual top class player, ill give you 800 of them have the profile opened for public because high level players surely care about their ranking (obviously i am being very generous here, go search dendi pub games you will almost always find 1-5 players that are anonymous), so in this case there are 200 top class players that will never be included in the stats results, ie the ranking of these 800 players will forever be not accurate because we know there are differences between top top top top class players and top class players. and then lets say 40000 out of the remaining 99000 players have made their profile public, that's a very generous number because that would mean almost 40% of the players are showing their profile. I think I'll stop here now because if you still think that DSR means anything then there is nothing more i say can persuade you to think otherwise lol. p/s: i am guessing that DSR is using somesort of 'curve fitting' model to 'predict' people rankings but in this case of dota2 player pool, it wont be a meaningful curve. Holy fuck. You're trying to argue against something that already happens in real life. Let me see if I can break this down really simply for you with a braindead example. When your country (I'm assuming the UK does these) conducts a census of the population, they do not collect data from every single person living in the UK. They collect an INCOMPLETE data set. Yet they can still draw conclusions from that data set like who the expect certain demographics to vote for, if there is mass migration from rural to urban districts, etc. Here's another example because of how adamantly you want to argue on a topic with which you clearly have no academic or professional experience. When Nate Silver perfectly predicted the 9 swing states for the US 2012 election, I PROMISE YOU he did not collect data from every single voter in those states. Drawing accurate conclusions from incomplete data is done ubiquitously all over the world in many different fields. DOTA2 is just one of them. You still dont get it do you. I'll put it in another angle to read my post:
'DSR is for some people who just wanted a number to say something about their skill/ranking'.
Of course it depends on how well one is convinced from that website but in reality that 'something' can be pretty meaningless. How meaningless it can be? nobody knows.
I am not even talking about the absolute accuracy here, i am talking about a convincing ranking. The fact that the website is telling people to stop stacking with noob friends in order to get a higher ranking means that they cant be sure of your skill level if you stacked. Valve who has all the real stats couldn't figure out a good MM to work (they will need to make a good ranking system behind to do so) and some magical website somehow capable to achieve that?
Funny because i am doing some population-based cohort study of some patients of a city so clearly I don't know anything about statistics.
Can we now back to talk about TC's obsession of the white tiger.
|
So your saying that if im top dsr i can go pro and quit school
HERE I COME TI4
|
On December 06 2013 06:44 BurningSera wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2013 06:17 devilesk wrote:On December 06 2013 06:11 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 06:05 SKC wrote:On December 06 2013 06:02 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 05:54 SKC wrote:On December 06 2013 05:53 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 05:47 SKC wrote:On December 06 2013 05:45 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 05:39 SKC wrote:
[quote]
The fact he queues with someone doesn't really change how good of a player he is. It means the average MMR of all players in those games are going to be lower than if he was solo q'ing. DSR is to some significant extent (from the creator's mouth) based off that value. I can't imagine Bulldog going EE-levels of tryhard in those kinds of games either, so it shouldn't shock anyone that he might have a lower DSR compared to pubstars. 2GD is a pubstar? Just because Admiral Bulldogs MMR is lower than it could be doesn't mean he should be that low. They also don't queue exclusivelly with each other. 2GD has even talked about how his games are very diferent when he doesn't stack with Draskyl. His MMR isn't that high at all. Right but MMR and DSR are different measures and not directly comparable as far as I know. If 2GD frequently stacks with people of higher MMR than him and Bulldog frequently stacks with people of lower MMR than him, this is an explanation for the difference in DSR's. Oh, sure, that could definatelly be the reason why they are diferent. Which is also why Dota Skill Rating is a shit Skill Rating if it doesn't rate skill. I don't think anyone is arguing MMR and DSR are not very diferent from each other. At least this is more debatable. Think about if LeBron James only played street ball with his friends. He's undoubtedly really good, but it's near impossible to determine his full skill potential at pro level using any rating system. It sounds like DSR is only valid for solo q'd games. This can be a weakness of course, or you could just consider that its results are only valid under certain circumstances. I don't see how useful a stat that only works in circumstances that don't exist can be. Almost noone plays solo queue exclusivelly, and the website is definatelly not making the distinction. It just means the currest rating is useless. And that's giving the benefit of the doubt that it would actually work in this imaginary scenario. There's been enough evidence (DSR predicting wins at high percent is the big one) that I believe DSR works in the optimal scenario (solo Q for last 20 games against other solo q'ers). The fact that it loses a lot of its accuracy under suboptimal conditions is certainly a disadvantage. It's the most legitimate complaint I've heard against it all thread. How is 65% high? Flipping a coin already gets you 50%. We have no other data to compare it to. How does DSR fare compared to other basic stats with respect to predicting game outcomes? Basically you and the creator claim that 65% is statistically significant. I haven't seen any actual reason as to why it is. Nobody laughs at my ass joke that i posted earlier Show nested quote +On December 05 2013 21:34 BurningSera wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 05 2013 19:01 hariooo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2013 18:45 BurningSera wrote:On December 05 2013 17:58 hariooo wrote:On December 05 2013 17:42 BurningSera wrote:On December 05 2013 17:08 hariooo wrote:On December 05 2013 15:44 njt7 wrote:
The only way to comparatively use DSR effectively is against yourself for later references. Comparing against others wont give you anything good. And the site is still in massive beta from the looks of it so your DSR number might change just for the worst just from patching.
The developer seems decent so in the future it might be useful but all of these different rating numbers is usually worthless for self improvement its dangerous to get caught in pointless ego boosting. If people actually want to improve their play they should watch their own replays and analyze as well as watching specific heroes/roles played by the best(pros) and try to emulate. Most important is probably to try to find people to play with/ against who is already better then you.
Not sure why I went on this rant but Im getting tired of this DSR/Dotabuff mania going on. Of course you can compare it to other people. It's also the whole basis of why DSR can predict the winner of a game. On December 05 2013 15:48 Staboteur wrote:On December 05 2013 15:21 FakeDeath wrote:
So I just tried out this mydotaskill.com thing everyone is talking about.
My DSR is 954 Emerald whatever that means.
Can this be taken as a legit base line of your skill level?
Not like a true indicator but more of where u stand in the dota ladder?
Though I wonder how they actually calculated your DSR.
What is the difference between this and Valve internal rating? DSR's gone through 3 or so iterations where they adjust the algorithms to produce new and exciting numbers that may or may not mean a damn thing to anyone at all. They're not a good indicator of skill. By the site's only admission, it is only able to predict the winner of any given game correctly 65% of the time. Seeing as that's only 15% better than a blind guess over many iterations, I'd say it is still pretty damn inaccurate. People who don't have a background in statistics need to stop saying things like this. 65% prediction accuracy over a large sample is RIDICULOUS and if that 65% is proven to be true it is clearly evidence of DSR's accuracy. It would be a statistical fact except people who don't study stats can't be convinced because they can't understand the proof. I dont think any of that matters when most of the player profile is set to be hidden by default. Meanwhile, Player number 34176943 DSR is: 1275 This player has a Pro DSR score (top 0,5%). >_> and my smurf now is 460. I am entertained enough by now, that will be the last time i visit the site. and i fcking respect the people behind dotabuff now. http://www.reddit.com/r/DotA2/comments/1s4ezx/mydotaskillcom_and_why_it_should_be_ignored/cdtubbcHidden profiles shouldn't matter. Yes it does very much so matters, unless some people just wanted a number to say something meaningless about their skill/ranking then it shouldn't matter to them i guess (or anything matters to them in that case, hence the ridiculous ranking from the website). You can talk about fancy stats techniques etc but in the end of day I hope people know that the site is a joke lol (a bigger joke than DBR if you must, and i actually respect the stats guys behind dotabuff now because they actually have the self-respect and morale as some statisticians. say 1000 out of 100000 players are actual top class player, ill give you 800 of them have the profile opened for public because high level players surely care about their ranking (obviously i am being very generous here, go search dendi pub games you will almost always find 1-5 players that are anonymous), so in this case there are 200 top class players that will never be included in the stats results, ie the ranking of these 800 players will forever be not accurate because we know there are differences between top top top top class players and top class players. and then lets say 40000 out of the remaining 99000 players have made their profile public, that's a very generous number because that would mean almost 40% of the players are showing their profile. I think I'll stop here now because if you still think that DSR means anything then there is nothing more i say can persuade you to think otherwise lol. p/s: i am guessing that DSR is using somesort of 'curve fitting' model to 'predict' people rankings but in this case of dota2 player pool, it wont be a meaningful curve. Holy fuck. You're trying to argue against something that already happens in real life. Let me see if I can break this down really simply for you with a braindead example. When your country (I'm assuming the UK does these) conducts a census of the population, they do not collect data from every single person living in the UK. They collect an INCOMPLETE data set. Yet they can still draw conclusions from that data set like who the expect certain demographics to vote for, if there is mass migration from rural to urban districts, etc. Here's another example because of how adamantly you want to argue on a topic with which you clearly have no academic or professional experience. When Nate Silver perfectly predicted the 9 swing states for the US 2012 election, I PROMISE YOU he did not collect data from every single voter in those states. Drawing accurate conclusions from incomplete data is done ubiquitously all over the world in many different fields. DOTA2 is just one of them. You still dont get it do you. I'll put it in another angle to read my post:
'DSR is for some people who just wanted a number to say something about their skill/ranking'.
Of course it depends on how well one is convinced from that website but in reality that 'something' can be pretty meaningless. How meaningless it can be? nobody knows.
I am not even talking about the absolute accuracy here, i am talking about a convincing ranking. The fact that the website is telling people to stop stacking with noob friends in order to get a higher ranking means that they cant be sure of your skill level if you stacked. Valve who has all the real stats couldn't figure out a good MM to work (they will need to make a good ranking system behind to do so) and some magical website somehow capable to achieve that?
Funny because i am doing some population-based cohort study of some patients of a city so clearly I don't know anything about statistics.
Can we now back to talk about TC's obsession of the white tiger.
It's been explained twice why it's statistically significant.
|
On December 06 2013 06:53 Darkren wrote:
So your saying that if im top dsr i can go pro and quit school
HERE I COME TI4
You have to really like Jpop and anime first.
|
|
|
On December 06 2013 06:56 hariooo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2013 06:44 BurningSera wrote:On December 06 2013 06:17 devilesk wrote:On December 06 2013 06:11 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 06:05 SKC wrote:On December 06 2013 06:02 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 05:54 SKC wrote:On December 06 2013 05:53 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 05:47 SKC wrote:On December 06 2013 05:45 hariooo wrote:
[quote]
It means the average MMR of all players in those games are going to be lower than if he was solo q'ing. DSR is to some significant extent (from the creator's mouth) based off that value. I can't imagine Bulldog going EE-levels of tryhard in those kinds of games either, so it shouldn't shock anyone that he might have a lower DSR compared to pubstars. 2GD is a pubstar? Just because Admiral Bulldogs MMR is lower than it could be doesn't mean he should be that low. They also don't queue exclusivelly with each other. 2GD has even talked about how his games are very diferent when he doesn't stack with Draskyl. His MMR isn't that high at all. Right but MMR and DSR are different measures and not directly comparable as far as I know. If 2GD frequently stacks with people of higher MMR than him and Bulldog frequently stacks with people of lower MMR than him, this is an explanation for the difference in DSR's. Oh, sure, that could definatelly be the reason why they are diferent. Which is also why Dota Skill Rating is a shit Skill Rating if it doesn't rate skill. I don't think anyone is arguing MMR and DSR are not very diferent from each other. At least this is more debatable. Think about if LeBron James only played street ball with his friends. He's undoubtedly really good, but it's near impossible to determine his full skill potential at pro level using any rating system. It sounds like DSR is only valid for solo q'd games. This can be a weakness of course, or you could just consider that its results are only valid under certain circumstances. I don't see how useful a stat that only works in circumstances that don't exist can be. Almost noone plays solo queue exclusivelly, and the website is definatelly not making the distinction. It just means the currest rating is useless. And that's giving the benefit of the doubt that it would actually work in this imaginary scenario. There's been enough evidence (DSR predicting wins at high percent is the big one) that I believe DSR works in the optimal scenario (solo Q for last 20 games against other solo q'ers). The fact that it loses a lot of its accuracy under suboptimal conditions is certainly a disadvantage. It's the most legitimate complaint I've heard against it all thread. How is 65% high? Flipping a coin already gets you 50%. We have no other data to compare it to. How does DSR fare compared to other basic stats with respect to predicting game outcomes? Basically you and the creator claim that 65% is statistically significant. I haven't seen any actual reason as to why it is. Nobody laughs at my ass joke that i posted earlier On December 05 2013 21:34 BurningSera wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 05 2013 19:01 hariooo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2013 18:45 BurningSera wrote:On December 05 2013 17:58 hariooo wrote:On December 05 2013 17:42 BurningSera wrote:On December 05 2013 17:08 hariooo wrote:On December 05 2013 15:44 njt7 wrote:
The only way to comparatively use DSR effectively is against yourself for later references. Comparing against others wont give you anything good. And the site is still in massive beta from the looks of it so your DSR number might change just for the worst just from patching.
The developer seems decent so in the future it might be useful but all of these different rating numbers is usually worthless for self improvement its dangerous to get caught in pointless ego boosting. If people actually want to improve their play they should watch their own replays and analyze as well as watching specific heroes/roles played by the best(pros) and try to emulate. Most important is probably to try to find people to play with/ against who is already better then you.
Not sure why I went on this rant but Im getting tired of this DSR/Dotabuff mania going on. Of course you can compare it to other people. It's also the whole basis of why DSR can predict the winner of a game. On December 05 2013 15:48 Staboteur wrote:On December 05 2013 15:21 FakeDeath wrote:
So I just tried out this mydotaskill.com thing everyone is talking about.
My DSR is 954 Emerald whatever that means.
Can this be taken as a legit base line of your skill level?
Not like a true indicator but more of where u stand in the dota ladder?
Though I wonder how they actually calculated your DSR.
What is the difference between this and Valve internal rating? DSR's gone through 3 or so iterations where they adjust the algorithms to produce new and exciting numbers that may or may not mean a damn thing to anyone at all. They're not a good indicator of skill. By the site's only admission, it is only able to predict the winner of any given game correctly 65% of the time. Seeing as that's only 15% better than a blind guess over many iterations, I'd say it is still pretty damn inaccurate. People who don't have a background in statistics need to stop saying things like this. 65% prediction accuracy over a large sample is RIDICULOUS and if that 65% is proven to be true it is clearly evidence of DSR's accuracy. It would be a statistical fact except people who don't study stats can't be convinced because they can't understand the proof. I dont think any of that matters when most of the player profile is set to be hidden by default. Meanwhile, Player number 34176943 DSR is: 1275 This player has a Pro DSR score (top 0,5%). >_> and my smurf now is 460. I am entertained enough by now, that will be the last time i visit the site. and i fcking respect the people behind dotabuff now. http://www.reddit.com/r/DotA2/comments/1s4ezx/mydotaskillcom_and_why_it_should_be_ignored/cdtubbcHidden profiles shouldn't matter. Yes it does very much so matters, unless some people just wanted a number to say something meaningless about their skill/ranking then it shouldn't matter to them i guess (or anything matters to them in that case, hence the ridiculous ranking from the website). You can talk about fancy stats techniques etc but in the end of day I hope people know that the site is a joke lol (a bigger joke than DBR if you must, and i actually respect the stats guys behind dotabuff now because they actually have the self-respect and morale as some statisticians. say 1000 out of 100000 players are actual top class player, ill give you 800 of them have the profile opened for public because high level players surely care about their ranking (obviously i am being very generous here, go search dendi pub games you will almost always find 1-5 players that are anonymous), so in this case there are 200 top class players that will never be included in the stats results, ie the ranking of these 800 players will forever be not accurate because we know there are differences between top top top top class players and top class players. and then lets say 40000 out of the remaining 99000 players have made their profile public, that's a very generous number because that would mean almost 40% of the players are showing their profile. I think I'll stop here now because if you still think that DSR means anything then there is nothing more i say can persuade you to think otherwise lol. p/s: i am guessing that DSR is using somesort of 'curve fitting' model to 'predict' people rankings but in this case of dota2 player pool, it wont be a meaningful curve. Holy fuck. You're trying to argue against something that already happens in real life. Let me see if I can break this down really simply for you with a braindead example. When your country (I'm assuming the UK does these) conducts a census of the population, they do not collect data from every single person living in the UK. They collect an INCOMPLETE data set. Yet they can still draw conclusions from that data set like who the expect certain demographics to vote for, if there is mass migration from rural to urban districts, etc. Here's another example because of how adamantly you want to argue on a topic with which you clearly have no academic or professional experience. When Nate Silver perfectly predicted the 9 swing states for the US 2012 election, I PROMISE YOU he did not collect data from every single voter in those states. Drawing accurate conclusions from incomplete data is done ubiquitously all over the world in many different fields. DOTA2 is just one of them. You still dont get it do you. I'll put it in another angle to read my post:
'DSR is for some people who just wanted a number to say something about their skill/ranking'.
Of course it depends on how well one is convinced from that website but in reality that 'something' can be pretty meaningless. How meaningless it can be? nobody knows.
I am not even talking about the absolute accuracy here, i am talking about a convincing ranking. The fact that the website is telling people to stop stacking with noob friends in order to get a higher ranking means that they cant be sure of your skill level if you stacked. Valve who has all the real stats couldn't figure out a good MM to work (they will need to make a good ranking system behind to do so) and some magical website somehow capable to achieve that?
Funny because i am doing some population-based cohort study of some patients of a city so clearly I don't know anything about statistics.
Can we now back to talk about TC's obsession of the white tiger. It's been explained twice why it's statistically significant.
People are saying that the 65% doesn't seem to be based in any real data and appears to be made up. Like a lot of what DSR seems to be.
|
On December 06 2013 07:18 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2013 06:56 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 06:44 BurningSera wrote:On December 06 2013 06:17 devilesk wrote:On December 06 2013 06:11 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 06:05 SKC wrote:On December 06 2013 06:02 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 05:54 SKC wrote:On December 06 2013 05:53 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 05:47 SKC wrote:
[quote]
2GD is a pubstar? Just because Admiral Bulldogs MMR is lower than it could be doesn't mean he should be that low. They also don't queue exclusivelly with each other.
2GD has even talked about how his games are very diferent when he doesn't stack with Draskyl. His MMR isn't that high at all. Right but MMR and DSR are different measures and not directly comparable as far as I know. If 2GD frequently stacks with people of higher MMR than him and Bulldog frequently stacks with people of lower MMR than him, this is an explanation for the difference in DSR's. Oh, sure, that could definatelly be the reason why they are diferent. Which is also why Dota Skill Rating is a shit Skill Rating if it doesn't rate skill. I don't think anyone is arguing MMR and DSR are not very diferent from each other. At least this is more debatable. Think about if LeBron James only played street ball with his friends. He's undoubtedly really good, but it's near impossible to determine his full skill potential at pro level using any rating system. It sounds like DSR is only valid for solo q'd games. This can be a weakness of course, or you could just consider that its results are only valid under certain circumstances. I don't see how useful a stat that only works in circumstances that don't exist can be. Almost noone plays solo queue exclusivelly, and the website is definatelly not making the distinction. It just means the currest rating is useless. And that's giving the benefit of the doubt that it would actually work in this imaginary scenario. There's been enough evidence (DSR predicting wins at high percent is the big one) that I believe DSR works in the optimal scenario (solo Q for last 20 games against other solo q'ers). The fact that it loses a lot of its accuracy under suboptimal conditions is certainly a disadvantage. It's the most legitimate complaint I've heard against it all thread. How is 65% high? Flipping a coin already gets you 50%. We have no other data to compare it to. How does DSR fare compared to other basic stats with respect to predicting game outcomes? Basically you and the creator claim that 65% is statistically significant. I haven't seen any actual reason as to why it is. Nobody laughs at my ass joke that i posted earlier On December 05 2013 21:34 BurningSera wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 05 2013 19:01 hariooo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2013 18:45 BurningSera wrote:On December 05 2013 17:58 hariooo wrote:On December 05 2013 17:42 BurningSera wrote:On December 05 2013 17:08 hariooo wrote:On December 05 2013 15:44 njt7 wrote:
The only way to comparatively use DSR effectively is against yourself for later references. Comparing against others wont give you anything good. And the site is still in massive beta from the looks of it so your DSR number might change just for the worst just from patching.
The developer seems decent so in the future it might be useful but all of these different rating numbers is usually worthless for self improvement its dangerous to get caught in pointless ego boosting. If people actually want to improve their play they should watch their own replays and analyze as well as watching specific heroes/roles played by the best(pros) and try to emulate. Most important is probably to try to find people to play with/ against who is already better then you.
Not sure why I went on this rant but Im getting tired of this DSR/Dotabuff mania going on. Of course you can compare it to other people. It's also the whole basis of why DSR can predict the winner of a game. On December 05 2013 15:48 Staboteur wrote:On December 05 2013 15:21 FakeDeath wrote:
So I just tried out this mydotaskill.com thing everyone is talking about.
My DSR is 954 Emerald whatever that means.
Can this be taken as a legit base line of your skill level?
Not like a true indicator but more of where u stand in the dota ladder?
Though I wonder how they actually calculated your DSR.
What is the difference between this and Valve internal rating? DSR's gone through 3 or so iterations where they adjust the algorithms to produce new and exciting numbers that may or may not mean a damn thing to anyone at all. They're not a good indicator of skill. By the site's only admission, it is only able to predict the winner of any given game correctly 65% of the time. Seeing as that's only 15% better than a blind guess over many iterations, I'd say it is still pretty damn inaccurate. People who don't have a background in statistics need to stop saying things like this. 65% prediction accuracy over a large sample is RIDICULOUS and if that 65% is proven to be true it is clearly evidence of DSR's accuracy. It would be a statistical fact except people who don't study stats can't be convinced because they can't understand the proof. I dont think any of that matters when most of the player profile is set to be hidden by default. Meanwhile, Player number 34176943 DSR is: 1275 This player has a Pro DSR score (top 0,5%). >_> and my smurf now is 460. I am entertained enough by now, that will be the last time i visit the site. and i fcking respect the people behind dotabuff now. http://www.reddit.com/r/DotA2/comments/1s4ezx/mydotaskillcom_and_why_it_should_be_ignored/cdtubbcHidden profiles shouldn't matter. Yes it does very much so matters, unless some people just wanted a number to say something meaningless about their skill/ranking then it shouldn't matter to them i guess (or anything matters to them in that case, hence the ridiculous ranking from the website). You can talk about fancy stats techniques etc but in the end of day I hope people know that the site is a joke lol (a bigger joke than DBR if you must, and i actually respect the stats guys behind dotabuff now because they actually have the self-respect and morale as some statisticians. say 1000 out of 100000 players are actual top class player, ill give you 800 of them have the profile opened for public because high level players surely care about their ranking (obviously i am being very generous here, go search dendi pub games you will almost always find 1-5 players that are anonymous), so in this case there are 200 top class players that will never be included in the stats results, ie the ranking of these 800 players will forever be not accurate because we know there are differences between top top top top class players and top class players. and then lets say 40000 out of the remaining 99000 players have made their profile public, that's a very generous number because that would mean almost 40% of the players are showing their profile. I think I'll stop here now because if you still think that DSR means anything then there is nothing more i say can persuade you to think otherwise lol. p/s: i am guessing that DSR is using somesort of 'curve fitting' model to 'predict' people rankings but in this case of dota2 player pool, it wont be a meaningful curve. Holy fuck. You're trying to argue against something that already happens in real life. Let me see if I can break this down really simply for you with a braindead example. When your country (I'm assuming the UK does these) conducts a census of the population, they do not collect data from every single person living in the UK. They collect an INCOMPLETE data set. Yet they can still draw conclusions from that data set like who the expect certain demographics to vote for, if there is mass migration from rural to urban districts, etc. Here's another example because of how adamantly you want to argue on a topic with which you clearly have no academic or professional experience. When Nate Silver perfectly predicted the 9 swing states for the US 2012 election, I PROMISE YOU he did not collect data from every single voter in those states. Drawing accurate conclusions from incomplete data is done ubiquitously all over the world in many different fields. DOTA2 is just one of them. You still dont get it do you. I'll put it in another angle to read my post:
'DSR is for some people who just wanted a number to say something about their skill/ranking'.
Of course it depends on how well one is convinced from that website but in reality that 'something' can be pretty meaningless. How meaningless it can be? nobody knows.
I am not even talking about the absolute accuracy here, i am talking about a convincing ranking. The fact that the website is telling people to stop stacking with noob friends in order to get a higher ranking means that they cant be sure of your skill level if you stacked. Valve who has all the real stats couldn't figure out a good MM to work (they will need to make a good ranking system behind to do so) and some magical website somehow capable to achieve that?
Funny because i am doing some population-based cohort study of some patients of a city so clearly I don't know anything about statistics.
Can we now back to talk about TC's obsession of the white tiger. It's been explained twice why it's statistically significant. People are saying that the 65% doesn't seem to be based in any real data and appears to be made up. Like a lot of what DSR seems to be.
That's not what they said at all. If you think the creator is lying about the 65% that's something else altogether. Don't pretend that people weren't asking why 65% was statistically significant when it's "so close to 50%" though.
|
On December 06 2013 07:28 hariooo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2013 07:18 Plansix wrote:
People are saying that the 65% doesn't seem to be based in any real data and appears to be made up. Like a lot of what DSR seems to be. That's not what they said at all. If you think the creator is lying about the 65% that's something else altogether. Don't pretend that people weren't asking why 65% was statistically significant when it's "so close to 50%" though.
Ummm no, thats EXACTLY what people said. 65% is utterly made up lol. Your assertion that a mythical number is statistically significant is what is so amusing.
|
On December 06 2013 07:31 Sn0_Man wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2013 07:28 hariooo wrote:On December 06 2013 07:18 Plansix wrote:
People are saying that the 65% doesn't seem to be based in any real data and appears to be made up. Like a lot of what DSR seems to be. That's not what they said at all. If you think the creator is lying about the 65% that's something else altogether. Don't pretend that people weren't asking why 65% was statistically significant when it's "so close to 50%" though. Ummm no, thats EXACTLY what people said. 65% is utterly made up lol. Your assertion that a mythical number is statistically significant is what is so amusing.
I'm also skeptical but it's possible to assume that the guy is not lying, personnaly i find it suspicious and i won't believe until he shows more data but as of now we cannot be certain that the guy is not telling the truth.
Obviously harioo chose to belieeeeeeve but no need to be so agressive.
|
i propose dsr to be showed next to our posts in tl
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
