.net
All site revenue goes to charity

Subject: Should we change the name for "Winnables"?


Date: Sat Jan 7 03:16:00 2023
User: cellmate
Message:

i find it odd that many have an obsession about the length of their streak yet have an acceptance of a premature finish


Date: Sat Jan 7 05:12:32 2023
User: Zonny
Message:
“Gutter Bumper”

Link: http://www.rookieroad.com/bowling/what-are-the-bumpers-0472999/

Date: Sat Jan 7 07:02:33 2023
User: outskirts
Message:
Suzanne, eating the rice cake, is TN.

Mary Jo, the little cute one, is the rest of us.

Note Suzanne's last words.


Link: 42 second video explains life, the universe, and TN

Date: Sat Jan 7 07:12:19 2023
User: outskirts
Message:
When I suggested "cheat-ables" in my original post, and gave a nod to Tony, I wasn't bashing Tony or agreeing with TN. I was being facetious about the whole thing. When someone is persecuted by being called names, they eventually "own" the name, just like the n word and the b word, and they wear it proudly, thus taking away it's power.

Date: Sat Jan 7 09:37:56 2023
User: HopDiriDiriDattiriDittiriDom
Message:

Winnable variant = a kind of user-friendly one

Others = Not-so-user-friendly kinds (you may choose to play at your own risk)


Date: Sat Jan 7 09:58:46 2023
User: outskirts
Message:
I posted the little rice cake video on my fb not long ago because it was so funny, especially that last line. And Julia was about to get off a zinger, probably.

Of course you all know that Mary Jo is the lovely Annie Potts, who is now Constance Tucker (Sheldon's Meemaw).

Date: Sat Jan 7 10:08:47 2023
User: BuzzClik
Message:

>>Date: Sat Jan 7 07:02:33 2023

>>User: outskirts

>>Message: "Suzanne, eating the rice cake..."

That's a cute clip, but there are lots of people around the table, and none of them are being passive and sweet. A better example: An aging group of characters from the Batman stories is gathered at a table discussing diets:

MAYOR OF GOTHAM CITY: This new diet of rice cakes with a schmear of jelly is really rough

POISON IVY: Is it really a diet, or are you "cheating" <air quotes and a wink, wink>

BATMAN: Plain rice cakes is the only true diet. Everything else is a compromise of virtue

POISON IVY: Always the pompous jerk. I used to be on a diet, ages ago. It sucked. So I quit dieting. Why are you always forcing your "morals" on everyone?

JOKER: Here's an idea, Batman: use this gun for a nice game of Russian Roulette. See how that helps your diet!

POISON IVY: <laughs loudly> Or maybe start the ultimate diet: starve yourself to death. Maybe then you'd lose some weight, you fat pig. Or at least you would finally shut up.

BATMAN: Diets are meant to be difficult. It is all part of the transcendental experience.

TWO FACE: I am a strict adherent to the rice cake diet. I just finished one. See?

BATMAN: You admitted that you sneak back to your room and eat candy bars and corn chips. That's cheating.

TWO FACE: You show me a legal document where it says that I can't eat snacks between rice cakes!

BATMAN: Do you really need written rules as your moral compass?

POISON IVY: Quit harassing him, fatman!  

BATMAN: Juvenile insults? Really?

POISON IVY:You hate me because I'm a woman

RIDDLER: Batman, you only criticize other people's diets because you are obsessed with the paleo diet. 

 BATMAN: When was I ever on a paleo diet? 

RIDDLER: You are obsessed with it. 

POISON IVY: That's right, fatman. And don't think that I'm flirting with you. I find you repulsive. 

BATMAN: What is your problem? 

POISON IVY: Quit bullying me!!!!!


Date: Sat Jan 7 10:20:37 2023
User: outskirts
Message:
It would take a pretty evil mind to think up all that.

Date: Sat Jan 7 10:50:03 2023
User: outskirts
Message:
User: HopDiriDiriDattiriDittiriDom
Message:
Winnable variant = a kind of user-friendly one
Others = Not-so-user-friendly kinds

User Friendly and User Unfriendly?


Date: Sat Jan 7 11:28:21 2023
User: outskirts
Message:
Lol. The look on Mary Jo's face at the end.

Date: Sat Jan 7 12:38:20 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:
It's patently obvious that some here have forgotten (or possibly were unaware), that before Buzz joined this particular ensemble cast, he was an award-winning writer for "All My Children".

Date: Sat Jan 7 12:48:00 2023
User: HopDiriDiriDattiriDittiriDom
Message:
"User Friendly and User Unfriendly?"

Usually I try to not say negative things. So usually I say

"Not-so-good" instead of "bad"
"Not-so-beautiful" instead of "ugly"
etc.

Date: Sat Jan 7 16:48:07 2023
User: cellmate
Message:

POW! BAM! THWACK! Well done Buzz!


Date: Sat Aug 26 06:41:21 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:

@ElGuapo (mostly) ----

A probably earlier-answered question for winnables............. (Sorry, I moderately perused some other threads with "winnables" in the title but didn't come close to finding the answer.  I suspect it was much earlier.)

Ok........so you all know I practically never play winnables unless it's maybe a WWC I take part in - and even rarely those.  But tonight I was in the mood to play some 9x2, but was too tired to play the regular ones, so I went weird and tried some W9x2s.  I know it's a limited sampling, but there seemed to be more elo points awarded than proper for the difficulty.  But my question is not that - but it made me think.....  It's whether or not the winnable-ness of winnables has been factored into elo points.  (I also don't chase those, so this is a bit out of my lane.)  I fear I know/suspect the answer is "no".  But now that almost all (with some significant abstainers, I realize) have accepted that winnables are 'easier' (to win, specifically) than regulars, is it time to incorporate that 'data' into elo?  I suspect the answer to that is also "no" for the reason that (supposedly) over time things will correct themselves.  But can't/shouldn't that process be accelerated to reflect 'known' reality? 

I don't expect to find any support for my idea, but I think it has merit.  But mostly, I just want to confirm for sure that such was not considered in elo ratings.  And of course this would also explain/confirm why the elo hunters play winnables so much.  


Date: Sat Aug 26 07:01:36 2023
User: HopDiriDiriDattiriDittiriDom
Message:

I don't know how you can interpret it but this is from my "Hop style Elo" page:

VariantGames wonGames LostElo GainedElo LostDiffDiff/Plays

9x271.5428.84757.919,22559.365,588-1.446,364-0,018
9x2w109.77630.545178.488,530181.018,762-2.530,232-0,018


Date: Sat Aug 26 07:07:44 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:

I assume that's from *your* play?  I *think* I understand what it means.

And you've played over 140,000 W9x2s?!?


Edit:  Or is that representing *all* players?

Further edit:  If the point is to show that the differential is very close, it doesn't take into account that (in general) weaker players would tend to play the winnables more.


Date: Sat Aug 26 07:22:25 2023
User: HopDiriDiriDattiriDittiriDom
Message:

All plays and yes I want to point out that the ratios are very close:


Edit:

"it doesn't take into account that (in general) weaker players would tend to play the winnables more"


I believe it is taken care of by Elo.


Date: Sat Aug 26 09:30:13 2023
User: cellmate
Message:

"But now that almost all (with some significant abstainers, I realize) have accepted that winnables are 'easier' "

TN logic


This was discussed at length in this thread.... Should winnable variants affect Elo?

(unfortunately the new new post editor lead to losing previous message formatting  so its harder to read)


Some numbers for 2022...
Streak vs Winnable
   9,2 Layout (all levels)
 49452 Streak games played
 35914 Winnable games played
 14838 Games played in both
  5581 Compared (games with same number of plays in both)
     5 Max plays per game
  4305 Games with same number of wins in both
   899 Regular has More wins
   377 Winnable has More wins




Date: Sat Aug 26 12:37:25 2023
User: rbw--3
Message:

If winnable is removed from ELO you take away 8x4, which is probably the only variant that has accurate ELO's at the game level.


Date: Sat Aug 26 13:46:35 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:

I'm not  suggesting take elo away - just wondering if it shouldn't be tweaked for those variants where there are both flavors.

Will look at the posted data later when I have more time...


Date: Sat Aug 26 14:52:40 2023
User: sebcbien2
Message:

if I check my stats, I'm better with regular 13x0 than 13x0w  but I'm not really representative


13x0

Win% = 96.66 %
Adj Win% = 96.65 %
Only Winnables Win% = 99.12 %
Win% per year : {"2021":{"%":"97.29","Total":295},"2022":{"%":"96.89","Total":5948},"2023":{"%":"96.31","Total":4368}}


13x0w

Win% = 99.08 %
Adj Win% = 99.06 %
Only Winnables Win% = 99.08 %
Win% per year : {"2021":{"%":"99.11","Total":1580},"2022":{"%":"98.94","Total":3391},"2023":{"%":"99.26","Total":2293}}


and same for (with much less played games)

9x2

Win% = 93.68 %
Adj Win% = 93.10 %
Only Winnables Win% = 93.68 %
Win% per year : {"2021":{"%":"93.75","Total":32},"2022":{"%":"93.98","Total":83},"2023":{"%":"93.22","Total":59}}

for 9x2w

Win% = 92.05 %
Adj Win% = 91.39 %
Only Winnables Win% = 92.05 %
Win% per year : {"2021":{"%":"93.94","Total":33},"2022":{"%":"92.65","Total":68},"2023":{"%":"90.00","Total":50}}



Date: Sat Aug 26 15:04:35 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:

I can now see that why I couldn't locate the proper thread(s) was because I searched for "winnables" instead of "winnable".  I think that's the second time I've done that.  Sheesh....


Date: Sat Aug 26 15:39:49 2023
User: TNmountainman
Message:

@ Hop...........   So there have been only 80,000+ games of regular 9x2 played, but over 140,000 of winnables??  That doesn't seem right at all.  The winnable flavor is MUCH younger, so even if by chance they were played at the same rate since that introduction, there should still be many more regular plays than winnable plays.  Seems to me.....


Date: Sat Aug 26 19:35:38 2023
User: rbw--3
Message:

9x2 has over 4 million plays. Hops might be from his ELO tracking totals.


Date: Sat Aug 26 21:13:01 2023
User: Punster
Message:

The winnable games are NOT "easier", they're the same game as the regular, but they've been proven to be winnable. They may SEEM easier to some, but they are the SAME game. Certain people want to label them as easier, but it's not true. I prefer playing winnable games because if I lose, it's because I messed up rather than the game was "unwinnable". It kinda reminds me of Russian Roulette.


Date: Sat Aug 26 23:28:13 2023
User: HopDiriDiriDattiriDittiriDom
Message:

Hop Style Elo Info

The results here are based on the data of every game played each day starting 9/13/2021.


Basics

The Elo ratings are calculated using the following:

  • Elo ratings for the unwinnable games are set to zero.
  • Elo ratings for the winnable games are set to the variant defaults.
  • Elo ratings for the players are set to 1500.
  • When a game with zero Elo points is lost, nothing is done.
  • Otherwise, an exchange of points is calculated and takes place.
  • If a game with zero Elo points is won, its Elo rating is first set to the variant default.

  • The daily files are in simple CSV format and processed locally first to generate the results you can find here.


    Date: Mon Aug 28 04:55:48 2023
    User: TNmountainman
    Message:

    Hop, as usual, you are too far past me, programming-wise, for me to interpret what all you're saying.  First of all..............is it correct to say that you have formulated your own elo calculations, separate from the one codified into the site's automatic calculations, courtesy of ElGuapo and others?  Do I remember that?  But I think I recall you saying it was very close??  Is the list above specifically for your own elo calculations, or is it for both sets?  I have NO idea what a "CSV" format is, and I suspect 90+% of the folks here don't, either.  So in general.......as I've noted before.......your lack of explanatory notes keeps me (and I'm sure others) from absorbing and utilizing some of your deep and detailed calculations.  This is *not* a complaint - only again pointing out that your attempts to connect to the non-programmers among us is just going over our heads.  Clearly your smorgasbord of ways to look at the data is wonderful, and several here can dig into them with ease.  I can't, and I think that's likely true of most.  But perhaps that's ok - your target audience is only the few who can digest your output, I think.  I just asked what I thought was a simple(?) question for ElGuapo, suspecting the answer was "no" [See my post at Sat Aug 26 06:41:21 2023 above], but have yet to receive a straight answer - at least that I can understand.


    And @ Punster - no need to go trod over that same ground again.  We've been there and done that.  I wasn't doing that.  I was presenting a 'new' "theory"/suggestion - based on the supposed answer I would get to my question. 


    Date: Mon Aug 28 05:30:14 2023
    User: cellmate
    Message:

    TN, i am astounded that you are not familiar with csv format


    Date: Mon Aug 28 05:51:52 2023
    User: TNmountainman
    Message:

    As I've noted before, my only programming experience was long ago - assembler language and Fortran.  Got no clue what "csv format" is.  No clue whatsoever.


    Date: Mon Aug 28 05:55:40 2023
    User: cellmate
    Message:

    TN, csv has nothing to do with programming. it's a data exchange format. so spreadsheets are also out of your realm as well?


    Date: Mon Aug 28 06:17:16 2023
    User: TNmountainman
    Message:

    Actually.....I used to be quite hot in spreadsheets - but that was also long ago.  I was a whiz in Quattro Pro, and maybe Lotus, as I recall.  Then I got good at Excel - but for various reasons, I didn't need to update that for a while, and my skills got 'stale'.  So..........altho I *used to be good*, I'm not remotely current, and have never heard of "csv". 

    p.s. - For my purposes these days, Excel still works fine.


    Date: Mon Aug 28 06:38:03 2023
    User: HopDiriDiriDattiriDittiriDom
    Message:

    "First of all..............is it correct to say that you have formulated your own elo calculations, separate from the one codified into the site's automatic calculations,"


    Right. But I like simplicity so I aproached it in a simpler manner (the basics part). But it still aproximates to the correct ratings. See "Games" tab for example. 8x4 level 5 is very similar to those in this site when sorted by ratings.


    Date: Mon Aug 28 06:38:48 2023
    User: cellmate
    Message:

    TN, so you download a .csv.... double click  it.... and it  opens Excel



    Date: Mon Aug 28 06:49:00 2023
    User: cellmate
    Message:

    i strongly endorse Hop's Hop Style Elo Info

    its pretty much the way i would do it

    its based on actual play data since 2021-09-13. its unfortunate that play data prior to that is not available

    best feature is that if any tweaks to the elo calculations are required everything can be re calculated 




    Date: Mon Aug 28 06:49:42 2023
    User: BuzzClik
    Message:

    TN — csv means comma separated values. Knowing that, you can get details from Wikipedia’s discussion: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma-separated_values

    ==========

    (Three posts were made while I slowly put together my response.)

    csv files allow portability between applications. A table of data can converted to a csv file and uploaded in another application with rows and columns intact. 


    Date: Mon Aug 28 06:56:31 2023
    User: TNmountainman
    Message:

    @ Hop - So help me understand the purpose of you developing your own calculations, if the result is so similar?  I'm sure you had a good reason.


    @ cellmate - interesting.  MrFixit has many times told 'us' to get the files we want from the site, but he's never told us *how* - what is required.  I'm assuming it's because he assumes that whoever *does* want them, can figure out how to get them - which is probably a reasonable assumption.  I wouldn't have a clue how to begin - but that's ok; I have no desire to manipulate them for my own purposes.  But it again highlights the gap between the programming-savvy here, and those of us who aren't.  And again, I'm not complaining, just pointing out that disparity/gap.  I'm again reminded of that study once upon a time that concluded about 85% of the burden of communication rests with the initiator - in general.  People here have complained because I'm "too wordy", etc., which altho true at times, is because I represent the other extreme here:  clarity through specificity - which often requires more verbiage.  The use of acronyms unknown by many is another example of the communication gap herein, but that's (sort of) a separate issue. 


    Date: Mon Aug 28 07:14:48 2023
    User: HopDiriDiriDattiriDittiriDom
    Message:

    My reason is curiosity. I wanted to see how the ratings would look like if all games start from an average rating. As you may know, in chess every player starts with an initial rating and over time the players reach their actual ratings.


    The data is there for this kind of experimentations.


    It also helps to see if we have good average ratings for the variants. For example the following is the averages for 8x4 level 5 to 12 (set in the code):

        935,982,1023,1062,1093,1113,1248,1268, // 8x4

    And the following is how they look like after processing the data at hand (they are very close except for level-5):

    8x4.927.146981.0801023.8631062.1731093.6451112.6911247.9801268.13


    As cellmate pointed out above I may set 927.146 for 8x4 level 5 in the code and run it from scratch and see what happens.


    Date: Mon Aug 28 15:29:29 2023
    User: TNmountainman
    Message:

    cellmate says "it's based on actual play data since 2021-09-13".  Is that not also true of the ElGuapo calculations?  If not, how are they different?  Some context would have explained that better. 

    And let me make sure I understand the different "starting point/initial conditions" of each method.  ElGuapo assigned different ratings for the different variants, based on *perceived* difficulty?? (Not trying to put words on his keyboard; that's just my general perception from when this all started.)  And then they've been adjusted, both by him, and by elo-adjusted play?  Is that all right so far?   *As opposed to* your method, in which ALL games started at 1500?  And so then how are "good average ratings" evaluated?  What is the standard?  Is the standard ElGuapo's method, or your method?

    And...............I don't want to make you all get bogged down in this; I'm just curious.  There was FAR too much wrangling and discussion back at the (elo) beginning to absorb it all - at least for me.  Way too many separate threads were ongoing at the same time.  I don't want to make you waste toooo much time on this, because I'm not gonna get wrapped up in it - altho it may seem to some that I am already.  :)


    All that said.....................still waiting on an answer to my initial question..............


    Date: Mon Aug 28 16:34:50 2023
    User: ElGuapo
    Message:

    TN, are you asking if we maintain two separate ratings for games that appear in winnable play? We don't. You can see the game ratings on the game stats page. Each game has only one rating.


    Date: Mon Aug 28 16:44:01 2023
    User: TNmountainman
    Message:

    Not exactly. I know each game only has 1 rating.  My question was:  was "winnable-ness" taken into account when assigning the 'initial' elo rating? (Not counting the 4-5000 stuck on the unwinnables later.)  I'm pretty sure not.  Then my corollary would be:  is that something that would be considered as a further refinement.  Again, I suspect not.  Just running it up the flagpole.......


    Date: Mon Aug 28 18:08:47 2023
    User: ElGuapo
    Message:

    I see. No, games were initially rated based on their win%. We're way past needing to refine the initial ratings though. Remember ratings have no memory, it's like a thermometer in water if that helps. It doesn't matter what the reading was before you put it in water.


    Date: Tue Aug 29 01:33:49 2023
    User: sebcbien2
    Message:

    Ratings have no memory , ok but it has an influence on the time needed to reach the right value

    Your thermometer will take more time to reach 15°C if it starts from 99 rather than from 10


    Date: Tue Aug 29 04:33:10 2023
    User: TNmountainman
    Message:

    Consider, ElGuapo, this thought experiment......

    Player A is playing 4x10, climate 5.  According to the cumulative stats, 61+% of those are winnable (or shall I say *are* won - some of you all maintain the actual numbers somewhere not easily findable on this site).  If said player is playing the regular version of 4x10, and draws game #160, for example, it is as of now 0/12, yet apparently is known to be winnable because its elo is listed as 1906.774.  But said player would have no idea if the game he was facing was winnable or not, and clearly it's a difficult game.  So he wouldn't know how much time to 'waste' trying to find a pathway, realizing that his quest might be futile.  (As a certain significant percentage are indeed unwinnable.)  There's a cost/benefit analysis that by necessity figures into how much time to spend on such games.  There's a "diminishing return" concept at play.

    Player B is playing 4x10, climate 5, but is playing the "Freecell Lite" version, also known as W4x10.  He may also draw game #160, but will KNOW it's winnable if only (s)he takes the time (or takes the deck of cards) to crack the case.  This knowledge represents an automatic advantage over the game.  Yes, as joey, Punster, and others note, "it's still the same game".  While true enough, the simple knowledge of having that advantage of "I'll win with enough effort and/or time (and/or cards)" makes a *huge* difference.  It's a clear advantage.

    So...........because of the way things were set up, player B will get a larger bang for his buck (reward/effort ratio) than player A, even tho they played the same game.  Player A had a harder road to travel, having first needing to determine if the game was even possible to win. 


    So............to reiterate my point...................since the games are known to be either winnable or unwinnable (among the variants with both flavors available), it would have seemed 'reasonable' to include "winable-ness" into the initial ratings, in addition to just winning percentage.  I know that would have been an extra step, and not knowing how the machinations of it all came together, that may have been a prohibitively long delay, as the process took quite a while as it was.  I do fully realize this is kinda a minor point, in the grand scheme of things, and yes, general win/lose play will eventually work that out - in the very, very long run.  But that's why I chose 4x10 for this example - the earth may no longer exist when the 4x10s get enough play to smooth that out. 

    But.............you've answered my initial question, that it was not taken into account.  Thank you for your time.


    Date: Tue Aug 29 11:35:01 2023
    User: ElGuapo
    Message:
    It may help to point out that all of the winnable variants are games that are *almost* all winnable already. It's not 61% for 4x10-5, it's like 99.4%.

    Date: Tue Aug 29 12:19:01 2023
    User: TNmountainman
    Message:

    Well, I knew it was way higher than 61%, but didn't know it was 99+%.  And yes, I knew the vast majority of winnables were 'already' winnable.  That mitigates my point a bit, but it still remains, imo.  


    Date: Tue Aug 29 17:35:49 2023
    User: TitanicTony
    Message:

    Gee, TN, why do you SO MUCH enjoy being so obnoxious, 😣?

    You may be just "running it up the flag pole, but I will never salute!


    Date: Tue Aug 29 18:44:05 2023
    User: BuzzClik
    Message:

    Tony, you are extraordinarily selective in declaring who is obnoxious. 


    Date: Tue Aug 29 18:47:11 2023
    User: TitanicTony
    Message:

    No other poster here are "obnoxious", imo.


    Date: Tue Aug 29 18:56:03 2023
    User: firenze
    Message:

    I thought personal attacks were not allowed on this discussion board?


    Date: Tue Aug 29 19:03:43 2023
    User: TitanicTony
    Message:

    Really?  TN's been attacking me for years, imo!



    Post follow-up
    Username: New user? Create a free account here
    Password: Note: username and password are case-sensitive
    Message:
    Editor by summernote.org
    Email notification:

    All content copyright ©2024 Freecell.net
    By using our games you consent to our minimal use of cookies to maintain basic state.
    Maintained by Dennis Cronin