|
are they making fruitdealer qualify again or does top somethingorother get a bye?
|
Roffles
Pitcairn19291 Posts
On October 11 2010 12:21 Two_DoWn wrote:
are they making fruitdealer qualify again or does top somethingorother get a bye?
Nope, no byes.
|
유두열 in the top 8 is "rex.just" (so google tells me..)
|
On October 11 2010 12:15 thesighter wrote:Show nested quote +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 single number.Except it obviously doesn't work that way.
|
PoltPrime was my bet to the previous gsl, since he qualifies again I wasnt THAT wrong =X
|
I hope Gerrard makes it again :3
|
On October 11 2010 12:15 thesighter wrote:Show nested quote +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.
Humans are very bad at properly analyzing statistics. They see streaks or odd occurrences in a set of data and think that there must be some sort of force at work to cause it to deviate from the mean. Whereas if you look at it logically, deviations from the mean are to be expected, especially if you have a small sample size like the 64 players from the GSL1.
Of course, I'm working off of what I've heard about the GSL qualifiers, which is that your seeding is completely random. It's possible there are other variables at work that I'm not aware of that are making it less than random (such as the ability to pick which day you play on).
|
On October 11 2010 12:15 thesighter wrote:Show nested quote +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.
Give new people a chance? If new people couldn't realistically beat the bottom half of the past qualifiers then they're terrible enough to not get in. I think you're drastically overestimating the skill of many of the players in season 1. Further, if they were as interested stacking the field for spectators, they would have done everything in their power to make sure July and some of the others who didn't qualify would have made it. Ignoring the lulsy statistics aside, your argument just doesn't hold a lot of water.
Lastly, your baseless speculation isn't needed. Unless you actually saw the second gunman on the grassy knoll, most of us aren't interested in random accusations. (edit: word choice)
|
On October 11 2010 12:24 Fanatic-Templar wrote:Show nested quote +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.aspx
The chance of seeing >= 75% of the qualifiers in half the days is less than 1% of 1%
eg this is non-random
|
On October 11 2010 12:15 thesighter wrote:
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.
So GSL is giving these "new people" easier runs to get into the R64 where they will get rolled 0-2 with ease and that will provide the GSL with 96 players worthy of being seeded?
And that makes sense to you?
On October 11 2010 12:15 thesighter wrote:
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.
16 players advance each day. So over these 2 "stacked" days 32 people can advance.
So far only 1 group has a chance to lose 1 "notable" player. And how many "notable" players lost in days 1 and 2?
Doesn't sound that bad statistically to me so far.
|
On October 11 2010 12:30 thesighter wrote:Show nested quote +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
Except its the chance that the majority of 64 people out of 2500 people get seeded randomly to 2 days.
|
Looks like oGsTOP made it to the Ro8
|
United States7481 Posts
김대곤 ( Only) through to the ro4, needs 1 more win (against cella or presumably clide) to qualify.
|
On October 11 2010 12:34 Drathmar wrote:Show nested quote +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 Except... guess what... its the chance of seeing 64 out of 2500 people in 2 days.
If you don't understand the math, don't bother replying. Statistically, it's near impossible for the brackets to be this stacked if the seeding of the season 1 players was fair.
|
Sorry I did not win yesterday everyone, but I did much better than the first qualifiers haha! Maybe next time I will start winning, correct a few mistakes I made. I was dominated during the first GSL qualifiers. This time I was in a nice 20 minute back and forth battle each match.
I hope TLO makes it in 64!
|
On October 11 2010 12:30 thesighter wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
So.... Clide and Cella are in the same half-bracket, which means only 1 of them can be in GSL 2.
Crazy tournament rules are crazy. oO
|
United States7481 Posts
On October 11 2010 12:38 ZenViper wrote:
Sorry I did not win yesterday everyone, but I did much better than the first qualifiers haha! Maybe next time I will start winning, correct a few mistakes I made. I was dominated during the first GSL qualifiers. This time I was in a nice 20 minute back and forth battle each match.
I hope TLO makes it in 64!
nice, good luck next time
which one were you?
|
|
|
On October 11 2010 12:36 thesighter wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2010 12:34 Drathmar 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 Except... guess what... its the chance of seeing 64 out of 2500 people in 2 days. If you don't understand the math, don't bother replying. Statistically, it's near impossible for the brackets to be this stacked if the seeding of the season 1 players was fair.
Not really, not when 2500 people are being chosen at random. It also makes no sense to stack all the notable people on 2 days of a non televised event.They would want as many notable people to make it as possible to boost viewership for the televised events.
Your math is also flawed. It would work if there were only 64 people who were being seeded, or a smaller number. But those 64 people are only 2.5% of the total people being seeded. That means the chance for 2.5% of the people to be evenly spread between 4 days... is astronomically low. You are trying to talk about a very small percentage of the total and do statistics on that without doing statistics on the full size. You fail.
Edit: Not to mention its only 70% on the last 2 days (19 already played out of the 64.) 45/2500 is only 1.8% of the total. The fact that 1.8% of the total is notable and all on half of the days isn't really anything that couldn't happen with randomness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
