|
On October 11 2010 12:58 Kantutan wrote:
There really should be bans for people throwing retarded incorrect math around.
My math is actually not incorrect. ... but you wouldn't ever understand.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
김정훈 = oGsTOP btw OP, (I'm just posting lots instead of editing.. to hopefully get people to read the sc2 news other than sighters failed year 10 maths)
|
Ok, I was just ignoring the statistics posts, but seriously...someone banhammer this thing.
|
Wow. I came cheering for Cella and Clide and all I see are post about silly % and statistics that has no relevance what so ever with GSL season 2 qualifier.
Please make another thread if you few wishes to argue~
|
On October 11 2010 12:57 thesighter wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2010 12:56 Drathmar wrote:On October 11 2010 12:54 thesighter wrote:On October 11 2010 12:51 Fanatic-Templar wrote:On October 11 2010 12:43 thesighter wrote:On October 11 2010 12:38 Fanatic-Templar wrote:On October 11 2010 12:30 thesighter wrote:On October 11 2010 12:24 Fanatic-Templar wrote:On October 11 2010 12:15 thesighter wrote:On October 11 2010 12:08 I_Love_Bacon wrote:
[quote]
No. No x1000.
They have no reason to get a "new faces" if the new faces are bad. If anything, they'd benefit from spreading all of the talent out as best they could so the level of games are overall higher. Name recognition, past, and back story is how fans spring up. A constant group of new faces does not encourage it; it discourages it. Instead of having a rooting interest in a match you simply find yourself asking. "Who are these 2 randoms?" The stated purpose of these first couple GSLs is to find 96 players and seed them for 2011. So I think GOM would have a reason to give some new people a chance. By new people, I mean ex-WC3, ex-SC1, foreigners, etc.., who did not play in season 1 or who are clearly not as good as the season 1 qualifiers. 75% of the GSL season 1 qualifiers did not play in the first two days of the tourney. Take a look at the number of round of 32, round of 16 players in the first 2 days. Why are the last 2 days so stacked? Statistically, it's quite unlikely to be so far off the mean. As far as my own knowledge of such goes, "statistically" a single event does not constitute a significant sample size for statistics applying to such events. I mean, if you throw a six-sided die, what are the chances that it lands on any one number? 1/6. Therefore, the odds favour a single thrown die not landing on any number. Except it obviously doesn't work that way. This is not a single throw of a die. Assume that we toss a coin for each of the season 1 qualifiers. Heads days 1-2, tails days3-4. What is the probability of getting 75% heads in 64 tosses? cumulative binomial probability distribution use this calculator http://stattrek.com/Tables/Binomial.aspxThe chance of seeing >= 75% of the qualifiers in half the days is less than 1% of 1% eg this is non-random Actually, it is a single event - you're asserting that Gom is deliberately placing previous players in the last two days of qualifiers, based on the fact that in the one, solitary, single event in which Gom has had previously participating players, many have played in the last two days. Randomness can provide random results, but you state there is intent, and there is no basis for such claims. This is the scenario. If GOM was fair, a season 1 qualifier would have a 50% chance of playing in the first 2 days, a 50% chance of playing in the last 2 days. Given that near 3/4ths of the season 1 players were not seeded in the first 2 days, there is statistically a 99.99% chance that the placement of the players was non-random. You can draw your own conclusions. I just rolled a siz-sided die. I got a 2. If the die was fair, there is a 5/6 chance that I would have gotten a number that wasn't a two. And yet that is what I got. You can draw your own conclusions. You really don't understand how this works, do you? There is an equal probability for every possible arrangement of players in a random seeding. There is an unlikely of every player from GSL Open 1 playing on Day 1, just as there is an unlikely probability of them being perfectly distributed among 4 days - 16 each day. If we had hundreds of qualifiers, you would see that the number of players from the previous season would likely even out, or if they didn't, then perhaps you'd have a point. But with this single event to account for, your argument has no basis. Incorrect. You've never taken a stats class, so I don't think you understand the concept of a cumulative distribution . Do a z-test on the probability of seeing at least 75% of the players in the 2nd half of the tourney. Except it isn't 75% of the players. THERE ARE 2500 PLAYERS NOT 64. Which invalidates your whole argument. That's just bad trolling on your part. I'm referring to 75% of the 64 season 1 qualifiers.
But you can't. Because they were not seeded as a group of 64. They were randomly seeded as part of a group of 2500. Again... it's the chance that 2.5% of the total players will actually follow statistics perfectly. The chance of 2.5% of the total falling into a perfect distribution is less than 0.0001 %.
|
United States7481 Posts
On October 11 2010 12:58 jiabung wrote:
I wish motbob were indeed a banling. Things would be a lot nicer in this thread.
And what is the basis for everyone regarding Clide so highly? I only know that he was hyped up a lot by Tastosis, but lost in the RO64.
Cella <3
he didn't lose in the ro64, it was the ro8 iirc.
also i show oGsTOP vs 반반쓰, not ITViewpoint (maybe same thing? dunno). anyway, 반반쓰 has been on Gisado a few times iirc, but wasn't so good that i think he's a real threat to TOP.
|
On October 11 2010 12:54 thesighter wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2010 12:51 Fanatic-Templar wrote:On October 11 2010 12:43 thesighter wrote:On October 11 2010 12:38 Fanatic-Templar wrote:On October 11 2010 12:30 thesighter wrote:On October 11 2010 12:24 Fanatic-Templar wrote:On October 11 2010 12:15 thesighter wrote:On October 11 2010 12:08 I_Love_Bacon wrote:On October 11 2010 12:02 thesighter wrote:On October 11 2010 11:51 FuRong wrote:
If there are no upsets in these brackets then we're looking at getting four solid players qualified, which would be a contrast to the large number of randoms from the first two days.
Clide, oGsTop, Polt and JookToJung (I think Cella beating Clide would be a pretty big uspet)
--> three Terran and a Zerg
I think a lot of the brackets are going to be stacked like this today, but if you think about it then it kind of makes sense. Obviously most of the amateur players (who either study or have jobs) will choose to play on the weekend rather than on a weekday, so the result is that the Monday and Tuesday brackets have less amateurs and therefore are stacked with a higher percentage of pros. I'd put money on the fact that GOM intentionally stacked Monday and Tuesday, so that amateurs would have a better chance the first 2 days. They wanted to get a crop of new faces for season 2. No. No x1000. They have no reason to get a "new faces" if the new faces are bad. If anything, they'd benefit from spreading all of the talent out as best they could so the level of games are overall higher. Name recognition, past, and back story is how fans spring up. A constant group of new faces does not encourage it; it discourages it. Instead of having a rooting interest in a match you simply find yourself asking. "Who are these 2 randoms?" The stated purpose of these first couple GSLs is to find 96 players and seed them for 2011. So I think GOM would have a reason to give some new people a chance. By new people, I mean ex-WC3, ex-SC1, foreigners, etc.., who did not play in season 1 or who are clearly not as good as the season 1 qualifiers. 75% of the GSL season 1 qualifiers did not play in the first two days of the tourney. Take a look at the number of round of 32, round of 16 players in the first 2 days. Why are the last 2 days so stacked? Statistically, it's quite unlikely to be so far off the mean. As far as my own knowledge of such goes, "statistically" a single event does not constitute a significant sample size for statistics applying to such events. I mean, if you throw a six-sided die, what are the chances that it lands on any one number? 1/6. Therefore, the odds favour a single thrown die not landing on any number. Except it obviously doesn't work that way. This is not a single throw of a die. Assume that we toss a coin for each of the season 1 qualifiers. Heads days 1-2, tails days3-4. What is the probability of getting 75% heads in 64 tosses? cumulative binomial probability distribution use this calculator http://stattrek.com/Tables/Binomial.aspxThe chance of seeing >= 75% of the qualifiers in half the days is less than 1% of 1% eg this is non-random Actually, it is a single event - you're asserting that Gom is deliberately placing previous players in the last two days of qualifiers, based on the fact that in the one, solitary, single event in which Gom has had previously participating players, many have played in the last two days. Randomness can provide random results, but you state there is intent, and there is no basis for such claims. This is the scenario. If GOM was fair, a season 1 qualifier would have a 50% chance of playing in the first 2 days, a 50% chance of playing in the last 2 days. Given that near 3/4ths of the season 1 players were not seeded in the first 2 days, there is statistically a 99.99% chance that the placement of the players was non-random. You can draw your own conclusions. I just rolled a siz-sided die. I got a 2. If the die was fair, there is a 5/6 chance that I would have gotten a number that wasn't a two. And yet that is what I got. You can draw your own conclusions. You really don't understand how this works, do you? There is an equal probability for every possible arrangement of players in a random seeding. There is an unlikely of every player from GSL Open 1 playing on Day 1, just as there is an unlikely probability of them being perfectly distributed among 4 days - 16 each day. If we had hundreds of qualifiers, you would see that the number of players from the previous season would likely even out, or if they didn't, then perhaps you'd have a point. But with this single event to account for, your argument has no basis. Incorrect. You've never taken a stats class, so I don't think you understand the concept of a cumulative distribution . Do a z-test on the probability of seeing at least 75% of the players in the 2nd half of the tourney.
Good thing we see an even split between all 2500 of the guys playing the 
|
Random... if the exec's at GomTV allowed Boxer and Nada to play in a stacked qualifier bracket they're stupid. I can just see the twitter feed... "Whoops, Boxer, Nada eliminated from GSL2 by fruitdealer and seokisoo... See you in GSL3!"
|
Clide won 2-0, and now... Clide vs Cella - whoever wins, still has one more match before qualifying, and the loser is eliminated...
In the other half of the bracket is oGsTOP, already to play the last match which determines whether he'll make it or not
|
On October 11 2010 12:58 jiabung wrote:
I wish motbob were indeed a banling. Things would be a lot nicer in this thread.
And what is the basis for everyone regarding Clide so highly? I only know that he was hyped up a lot by Tastosis, but lost in the RO64.
Cella <3
He practices with Cool and Tester, but that doesn't mean Cella is done! I hope Cella sings and Clide falls asleep for an easy victory.
|
Go Zergs. I'm through with the annoying statistics talk.
|
On October 11 2010 12:59 Antoine wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2010 12:58 jiabung wrote:
I wish motbob were indeed a banling. Things would be a lot nicer in this thread.
And what is the basis for everyone regarding Clide so highly? I only know that he was hyped up a lot by Tastosis, but lost in the RO64.
Cella <3
he didn't lose in the ro64, it was the ro8 iirc. also i show oGsTOP vs 반반쓰, not ITViewpoint (maybe same thing? dunno). anyway, 반반쓰 has been on Gisado a few times iirc, but wasn't so good that i think he's a real threat to TOP.
ah  I just googled and his name popped up and assumed it was him! but it seems thats a website
|
On October 11 2010 12:58 jiabung wrote:
I wish motbob were indeed a banling. Things would be a lot nicer in this thread.
And what is the basis for everyone regarding Clide so highly? I only know that he was hyped up a lot by Tastosis, but lost in the RO64.
Cella <3
Uh no... Clide got to RO16. But it's mainly because of Tastosis' jokes about him.
Oh, and he's in TSL which is a pretty big deal
|
On October 11 2010 12:58 jiabung wrote:
I wish motbob were indeed a banling. Things would be a lot nicer in this thread.
And what is the basis for everyone regarding Clide so highly? I only know that he was hyped up a lot by Tastosis, but lost in the RO64.
Cella <3
But he played extremely solid games. I thought, just by watching respective games, he is better than OgsTop or MakaPrime or OgsEnsnare.
|
omfg where are the mods to ban this bs, this isn't stats class nobody fucking cares. Player updates only with random posters asking if Huk is gonna be in this and if there will be a stream onry!
|
On October 11 2010 13:00 figq wrote:
Clide won 2-0, and now... Clide vs Cella - whoever wins, still has one more match before qualifying, and the loser is eliminated...
In the other half of the bracket is oGsTOP, already to play the last match which determines whether he'll make it or not
This suuucks. Both players had success in the last tourney and now one has to eliminate the other? Weak!
|
On October 11 2010 13:01 Aim 4 My Head wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2010 12:58 jiabung wrote:
I wish motbob were indeed a banling. Things would be a lot nicer in this thread.
And what is the basis for everyone regarding Clide so highly? I only know that he was hyped up a lot by Tastosis, but lost in the RO64.
Cella <3
Uh no... Clide got to RO16. But it's mainly because of Tastosis' jokes about him. Oh, and he's in TSL which is a pretty big deal
Clide also demolished DAVIT in RO32...very nice games.
|
Baltimore, USA22259 Posts
Take the off-topic posts to private messages please. Let's stay on topic here.
|
can we know results on cella vs clide asap xP
|
Please, could anybody remind me who Clide lost to? I felt he was the best terran, because he was winning against opponents so effortlessly. Of course, the best terran along with ITR.
|
|
|
|
|
|
38306
2214
466
EPT
