Danish Bot Norm
Posted By: Henrik Bukkjaer In Response To: Danish Bot Norm (Christian Munk-Christensen)
Date: Saturday, 28 December 2013, at 2:44 a.m.
In Response To: Danish Bot Norm (Christian Munk-Christensen)
CMC is correct in all of this.
Cherry-picking was discussed in our system. It really isn't as big a problem as it might seem, if you consider:
- Having a limited number of shots available
- Having a limited period of time to score your matches
- Having a tough enough requirement for getting a match approved
In our case, the analysis is a one-pass, not the WC. One-pass analysis will yield higher PRs in the long run, than multiple pass on errors will.
Our setup requires 15-25 point matches, not 7+ points. There's a BIG difference in scoring a low PR in a 7-pointer and a 17-pointer.
So, like Mochy says: if you're a 6 avg. player, you don't go under 4 in 10 matches. For our bot-norm it's the same, if you're not strong enough, you simply won't make 5 below 3.5 in 17 pointers in one year. You might get one or two, or even three, but not five.
Then, acknowledging that there are strong players, and there are strong players, which is not the same breed at all, we have 2nd, 3rd and 4th bot-norm to aim for. The requirement simply drop .5 for each norm. Having scored the first norm will then require you to post 5 below 3.0 for the 2nd norm, etc. If I recall correctly, we currently have 3 players in the DBgF who are trying for their 3rd norm, needing 5 live clocked 17-point matches under 2.5. That's really tough. When we setup the system, we predicted that less than 10 players in the world (at that time) would be able to score such a norm, and that we maybe only had a couple of active players in DBgF who could.
By the way, the first player to score two norms was Freddie Noer - a guy we did NOT have on our minds when starting up. This system really allowed him to shine like he should.
Now, why did we go for a system allowing cherry-picking at all?
Simply to get things going. It's much much more flexible. It's easier for players to give it a shot without necessarily having to go public with all their numbers. It was simply go get people to start recording matches. It also had the effect, that "advanced" players started to record, just to see if they could pass the mark (maybe not for 5 matches and the norm, but simply for one match, and then be on the lists).
I was "pro" having the requirement of registering before a match, and then having to submit your PR mandatory afterwards, just so we got all the matches files and recorded, and so that the DBgF got all the numbers, but we settled for the open and flexible option. You can record as you like - if a match is good enough, submit it!
Finally there's the question of adjusting to your opponent. Cherry-picking allows you to adjust all you want in a given match-up, and then throw that match away afterwards. Then you can submit the matches where you play to score as low a PR as you can (against top players). We didn't want to make a system, that would force you to tradeoff winning chances in order to get a norm. We wanted to make a system that could get you the norm in the matches you selected to play a low PR.
Only downside I see to our system is, that we cannot say of a player (based on his submissions), that he is a X.X PR player! And you shouldn't draw the conclusion that just because player A has a DBgF bot-norm, he's a 3.5 player. No he's not. He's capable of playing 3.5 repeatedly in tough matches. He's not averaging 3.5!
Messages In This Thread
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.