Not really, no, since generally people have win % higher than 50 as town, and lower than 50% as scum, you don't fit the normal pattern. You win way too often as scum and not often enough as town.
Not true, seeing as he's been around the site more than a year now, I think a year of data is enough for a title, especially since titles have been based off of one event in the past.
Not really, no, since generally people have win % higher than 50 as town, and lower than 50% as scum, you don't fit the normal pattern. You win way too often as scum and not often enough as town.
I'd argue I fit this pattern better. But Elias does deserve some recognition for 10-1 that's flat out crazy.
Thok wrote:Shouldn't we be basing titles on more then 11 pieces of data? Talk to me when he's 40-10 as scum and 25-25 as town.
UNFAIR STANDARDS ALERT
UNFAIR STANDARDS ALERT
how many games as SK do you have to merit your title, anyways? surely you must be at least 0-50 for a title to be based on whether or not you're a disgrace to SKs
JDodge wrote:how many games as SK do you have to merit your title, anyways? surely you must be at least 0-50 for a title to be based on whether or not you're a disgrace to SKs
My title isn't simply "Thok is bad at being an SK" (in fact I'm 0-2-1 as an SK, with a draw in Muppets, a loss in a Minvational where I was NK night 1, and the game where my title comes from, which is a reasonable standard for success for most SK's), but rather recognizing a particularly memorable event, that among other things won CA a scummy.
If Elias didn't keep track of his stats in his sig, would we be having this discussion at all? That's my standard for being significant.
I replaced into Chess Mafia for 6 months, and all I got was a win and this lousy sig.
If we assume scum winning percentage is 50%, there's about a 1/200 chance of having a scum record of 10-1 or 11-0 in their games (and really, since we'd have this discussion but backwards if the records were flipped, I should include the possibility of 1-10 or 0-11 and make is about 1/100.) That's good but we have a lot of people on this site, and I wouldn't be shocked if a person randomly was 10-1 or 11-0 or even better.
There's also the question of whether Elias's is actually good, or getting somewhat lucky. (Probably the answer is a combination of both.)
You'll have better luck finding some particularly cool scum gambit that Elias pulled off and basing a title off of that. It would likely give a more interesting title also.
I can't help it if people fail basic statistics.
I replaced into Chess Mafia for 6 months, and all I got was a win and this lousy sig.
Thok wrote:If we assume scum winning percentage is 50%, there's about a 1/200 chance of having a scum record of 10-1 or 11-0 in their games (and really, since we'd have this discussion but backwards if the records were flipped, I should include the possibility of 1-10 or 0-11 and make is about 1/100.) That's good but we have a lot of people on this site, and I wouldn't be shocked if a person randomly was 10-1 or 11-0 or even better.
There's also the question of whether Elias's is actually good, or getting somewhat lucky. (Probably the answer is a combination of both.)
You'll have better luck finding some particularly cool scum gambit that Elias pulled off and basing a title off of that. It would likely give a more interesting title also.
I can't help it if people fail basic statistics.
You really need to stop undermining the point of the title. Whether or not luck has gotten him this far has nothing to do with it; the fact is, he wins when he's mafia, and to pass it off as if it wasn't true pins you as the current penultimate of douchebaggery.