Re: NTBB: Stats
Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2013 11:22 pm
A question I've asked many times, though I'm not sure why you're asking Dode - unless he was a secret member of the BBRC? Tell me, Koadah... where is Jimmy Hoffa's body buried?koadah wrote:So Dode, where are all the statistics and analysis that the BBRC used to decide that their job was done?
My only "rigorous standard" is that there be a legitimate statistical basis for changes if you're claiming that there is one. You're not too stupid to have read that in one of the 10 posts I've pointed out that I don't oppose houserules, just things that claim to be stats based when they're not... you're just, as usual, being deliberately obtuse.koadah wrote:Did they satisfy VMs rigorous standards?
He doesn't have to prove they are - plasmoid would have to prove that they are NOT. The base assumption shouldn't be that things are broken, but that things aren't broken, and the analysis is what you use to show that things are likely not as they should be. Luckily, a hundred years of brilliant mathematicians have spent their lives developing methods to do it if you can be bothered to learn how - if you can't, then don't be surprised when the legitimacy of the stuff you DO bother to do, is questioned.koadah wrote:Unless you are going to prove that they are already within Plasmoid's tiers then yes, I'm for him to call it narrow tiers.
"Seem" meaning... you don't understand them, so they must not be real. Your logic is, as always, impeccable.koadah wrote:So far your stats don't seem to be any more real than our witchcraft.
Yeah, man, why are you letting the truth get in the way of a good story? Darkson has it right - if he doesn't understand it, and doesn't like it, then it has no place in his world and just serves to muddy the waters. Can those thick books stop a punch, college boy???Darkson wrote:You want to break the World down into statistics and data, go ahead. You already killed one discussion with your demands that people quantify their feelings with cold hard facts.
I bet neither you nor those people would be in a big hurry to use a medical system built on "feel", or drive cars designed by "feel", or live in houses that were built on "feeling-based" principles, etc. Your entire life is data-driven, and just because statistics and data analysis confuse you does not mean that they're some hard and confusing thing that should be reserved for what you perceive to be "critical" portions of life.Darkson wrote:I'll be sitting in the corner playing a game with people who "feel" something., and don't need reams of data to suggest changes that work for them.
I don't. He stated, outright, that he couldn't be bothered to even look up how to calculate CIs, much less learn statistical analysis of any relevant sort. That doesn't suggest he's going to suddenly decide to learn and then actually do the work.dode74 wrote:Either do the maths or remove the implication. I believe plasmoid is doing the maths.
Most people will just eyeball numbers and draw conclusions from them... because they don't know how to do otherwise. Those same people will, however, tend to side with statistical analysis if they're offered the results of that, and just someone saying "well, I think..." when they don't already have a well-established opinion themselves... and as well they should. The dangerous thing is when people misrepresent their simple opinions as statistics.. or just throw out meaningless numbers to convince undecided people that those mean something they don't, hence the adage "there are lies, damned lies, and statistics". Numbers don't lie, but people can use numbers to tell lies, as is the case with plasmoid's unqualified means on the first page. I don't think he's deliberately lying with them (though some of his statements made in this and the other thread do suggest he'd be willing to misrepresent data if it would support his ideas) but the numbers are being used to misrepresent the truth regardless.koadah wrote:It might imply that to a handful of stats nuts but I suspect most of the average punters think he'll just eyeball some results data pretty much as we would.
So long as the W stands for "worthless" or "wrong", sure.koadah wrote:Gut feel, witchcraft & hand waving FTW
Uhm... before you go any further.. didn't those files include games going back as far as 2005? You realize that FUMBBL only switched to CRP in early 2012, right? Also, I'm pretty sure box, ranked, and league didn't switch to CRP at the same time, so you'd need to filter down that data to only include games that were actually played under the rules that we're discussing.Pluisje wrote:Ok, I have some numbers for Amazons only. I took the 250.000+ games in the file kindly supplied by Koadah...
Across all TV levels they don't, no. The issue (some people feel exists) with Amazons is that they start overly strong and then get weaker with TV.. it averages out to be closer to 50%, but this is the reason I made that hyperbolic example of a team that has a 100% win rate for half the TV ranges played, and 0% win rate for the other half. Is that team "balanced"? It is by the originally stated criteria, which is why I question that criteria's utility.Pluisje wrote:So it looks that Amazons don't come above the 55% in Box and Ranked, statistically speaking.