| |
BGonline.org Forums
about those doubles
Posted By: Phil Simborg In Response To: about those doubles (Chuck Bower)
Date: Thursday, 30 April 2015, at 8:03 p.m.
Chuck said: "Suppose pre-bot someone had told you that in a regional/national Open event, the luckier player won 95% of matches. What would you have said then? But isn't that (ballpark) what the bots tell us today?"
I refuse to believe that is what the bots are telling us today. If the luckier player (according to the bots) does win 95% of the time why do Mochy and other top Giants have such a good w/l record? How is that possible?
It's because the luck factor does not determine the winner 95 percent of the time. There is skill, and the luck factor, as I stated early, is not a true measure of luck...it only measures how good the dice were, but it did not measure how difficult the decisions were.
I certainly can agree that if you pit two exactly equal players against each other, in the long run, there will be a very high correllation between the luck factor and the winner, but only a very small percentage of matches do we have players who are extremely close.
Now, in the finals and semifinals of major tournaments, it probably is true that in most cases, the PR's of the opponents are pretty close, and it may be when you get to that point, there is a strong correlation between the luck factor and who wins. I am not aware of any study that shows this to be as high at 95% however, even at that level.
Let's assume, for a moment, that your number is correct. I sure wasted a whole lot of time and money studying this frigging game! If that is anywhere close to true, we might as well get a hold of our next opponent and flip a coin and save all that trouble! I cannot and will not accept that the luck factor is that big, and I know from experience, by consistently beating worse players and consistently losing to better players that the luck factor only matters in the very short run.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.