BGonline.org Forums

Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited

Posted By: Stick
Date: Friday, 5 December 2008, at 1:02 a.m.

In Response To: Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited (Mislav Radica)

For matches of any length there are only four divisions I care about.

• 0-2.0 = well fuckin' played



• 2-3.5 = pretty damn good



• 3.5-4 = acceptable



• 4+++ = why suck?

Stick

Messages In This Thread

• Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
  Mislav Radica -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 12:21 a.m.
  • Ok, extra-terrestrial should exist
    Mislav Radica -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 12:38 a.m.
    • Ok, extra-terrestrial should exist
      Coolrey -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 4:21 a.m.
      • something about error rates.
        Iancho Hristov -- Tuesday, 9 December 2008, at 5:07 p.m.
        • something about error rates.
          Matt Cohn-Geier -- Tuesday, 9 December 2008, at 5:36 p.m.
        • Does 2.5-3.5 is more appropriate for best players category?
          Mislav Radica -- Thursday, 11 December 2008, at 9:23 a.m.
          • or this one a little bit rigorous?
            Mislav Radica -- Thursday, 11 December 2008, at 9:27 a.m.
            • or middle road
              Mislav Radica -- Thursday, 11 December 2008, at 9:34 a.m.
          • Does 2.5-3.5 is more appropriate for best players category?
            Daniel Murphy -- Friday, 12 December 2008, at 5:40 p.m.
            • Does 2.5-3.5 is more appropriate for best players category?
              Matt Cohn-Geier -- Friday, 12 December 2008, at 5:47 p.m.
    • Ok, extra-terrestrial should exist
      neilkaz -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 9:05 p.m.
      • Error rates revised
        Mislav Radica -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 9:48 p.m.
        • Hm, Novice or Awful! and Supernatural or Extra-terrestrial? *NM*
          Mislav Radica -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 9:55 p.m.
          • Hm, Novice or Awful! and Supernatural or Extra-terrestrial?
            happyjuggler0 -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 10:24 p.m.
  • Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
    Stick -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 1:02 a.m.
    • Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
      Mislav Radica -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 6:55 a.m.
    • Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
      Barry Silliman -- Sunday, 7 December 2008, at 1:51 p.m.
    • Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
      christian munk-christensen -- Sunday, 6 March 2011, at 8:29 a.m.
      • Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
        Stick -- Sunday, 6 March 2011, at 4:13 p.m.
    • Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
      Michael Depreli -- Sunday, 6 March 2011, at 2:24 p.m.
  • Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
    Maik Stiebler -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 11:17 a.m.
    • ERs are just for quick report and comparison and fun
      Mislav Radica -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 1:15 p.m.
      • ERs are just for quick report and comparison and fun
        Stick -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 1:19 p.m.
      • ERs are just for quick report and comparison and fun
        Matt Cohn-Geier -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 3:12 p.m.
        • ERs are just for quick report and comparison and fun
          Stick -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 3:18 p.m.
          • ERs are just for quick report and comparison and fun
            Matt Cohn-Geier -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 3:21 p.m.
            • Reaching world class 3.8 level is possible
              Mislav Radica -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 8:50 p.m.
              • Reaching world class 3.8 level is possible
                Matt Cohn-Geier -- Sunday, 7 December 2008, at 9:33 a.m.
                • Reaching world class 3.8 level is possible
                  Mislav Radica -- Sunday, 7 December 2008, at 4:28 p.m.
                  • Reaching world class 3.8 level is possible
                    Matt Cohn-Geier -- Sunday, 7 December 2008, at 4:58 p.m.
                    • Reaching world class 3.8 level is possible
                      Mislav Radica -- Sunday, 7 December 2008, at 6:28 p.m.
                    • Reaching world class 3.8 level is possible
                      Bob Koca -- Sunday, 7 December 2008, at 8:41 p.m.
                    • Reaching world class 3.8 level is possible
                      Martin -- Sunday, 7 December 2008, at 8:49 p.m.
                      • Reaching world class 3.8 level is possible
                        Matt Cohn-Geier -- Monday, 8 December 2008, at 9:08 a.m.
    • Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
      Matt Cohn-Geier -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 3:15 p.m.
      • Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
        Daniel Murphy -- Monday, 8 December 2008, at 2:35 a.m.
        • Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
          Matt Cohn-Geier -- Monday, 8 December 2008, at 9:17 a.m.
  • Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
    Keene -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 4:30 p.m.
    • Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
      Stick -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 4:36 p.m.
      • Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
        Keene -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 7:29 p.m.
        • Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
          Stick -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 7:36 p.m.
          • Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
            Keene -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 10:01 p.m.
        • Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
          Mislav Radica -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 8:39 p.m.
    • There is a difference in the way gnu and snowie calculates snowie number
      rew -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 8:16 p.m.
      • There is a difference in the way gnu and snowie calculates snowie number
        Martin -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 8:31 p.m.
    • We can make suggestion for GNUbg developers
      Mislav Radica -- Friday, 5 December 2008, at 8:33 p.m.
  • Snowie's error rate ranges and names revisited
    phlegethos -- Thursday, 11 December 2008, at 3:35 p.m.
  • Error rate ranges and names revisited
    Leonardo Jerkovic -- Saturday, 5 March 2011, at 6:35 p.m.
    • Error rate ranges and names revisited
      Dmitriy Obukhov -- Saturday, 5 March 2011, at 7:34 p.m.
      • Error rate ranges and names revisited
        Leonardo Jerkovic -- Saturday, 5 March 2011, at 7:54 p.m.
        • Error rate ranges and names revisited
          Dmitriy Obukhov -- Saturday, 5 March 2011, at 9:50 p.m.
          • Error rate ranges and names revisited
            Stick -- Saturday, 5 March 2011, at 10:16 p.m.
            • Error rate ranges and names revisited
              Leonardo Jerkovic -- Saturday, 5 March 2011, at 10:48 p.m.
            • Error rate ranges and names revisited
              Dmitriy Obukhov -- Sunday, 6 March 2011, at 3:28 a.m.
              • Error rate ranges and names revisited
                Bill Calton -- Sunday, 6 March 2011, at 3:48 a.m.
              • Error rate ranges and names revisited
                Leonardo Jerkovic -- Sunday, 6 March 2011, at 9:53 a.m.
    • Error rate ranges and names revisited
      Stick -- Saturday, 5 March 2011, at 8:07 p.m.
      • Averaging under a 2 PR
        Timothy Chow -- Sunday, 6 March 2011, at 8:19 p.m.
      • Averiging under 2 PR
        Leonardo Jerkovic -- Wednesday, 9 March 2011, at 5:06 a.m.
        • Averiging under 2 PR
          Stick -- Wednesday, 9 March 2011, at 8:06 a.m.
          • Averiging under 2 PR
            Leonardo Jerkovic -- Wednesday, 9 March 2011, at 7:52 p.m.
      • Error rate ranges and names revisited
        David Rockwell -- Wednesday, 9 March 2011, at 6:01 a.m.