Dominion Strategy Forum
Archive => 2016 DominionStrategy Championships => Archive => 2012 => Topic started by: ednever on December 06, 2012, 03:12:46 pm
-
I've been looking through the brackets and I realized what I'm really looking for is seeing upsets - when a much lower anked person wins against a much higher ranked person.
I thought I would strat a thread to keep track of them - for everyone who doesn't want to go through all four challonge sheets every day. If you see an upset post it here (or if you are upset yourself...)
So far:
Round One:
Gardens:
bjmartin (49) over qmech (16)
Mad Dog (45) over Silent Revenge (20)
shraeye (53) over Cherdano (12)
Witch:
Lowpants (49) over Fumachu (16)
SirPeeples (47) over Powerman (18)
Lord Hegie (51) over Qvist (14)
Thief:
Indur (40) over AgileCaveman (25)
Ipnotaizig (45) over Vichu (20)
PitzerMike (44) over Loppo (21)
Zappie (47) over pechoho (18)
Chapel:
MBergstrom (44) over Schneau (21)
EgorK (39) over Moomi (26)
Will Lord Hegie be the new RisingJaguar? We will have to wait and see...
(Lord Hegie currently leads for the biggest upset so far in the tournament - seed 51 over a seed 14! Maybe there should be an award for the biggest upset - defined by the absolute difference in seed level between the two players?)
Ed
Ed
-
Interesting stuff, thanks for posting this! If you happen to notice another, would you also take note of the game split? Convincing upsets are even more interesting than narrow ones. :)
-
I was shocked to see the Q's--Qvist and qmech--out so early.
-
I was shocked to see the Q's--Qvist and qmech--out so early.
Don't worry they get shot #2 in the losers bracket.
-
Interestingly these are all in the 40-50 over 15-25 range.
-
Not a big upset, but I lost (28) in the Chapel bracket to Beyond Awesome (37)
-
I've been watching the upsets myself. These are most easily detected on the Entry List (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=5687.0) page, where those out of the tournament are crossed out and the round they were eliminated is recorded. As someone who was upset, I am upset about all the upsets!
Actually not really, it was a great series. I'm just glad I wasn't the highest seeded player upset.
-
+1 for the award for upsetting.
I was going to say:
"but absolute difference in seed does not feel good. If the distribution of levels behaved linearly, then absolute difference would be a good measure, but it does not. Its probably more like exponential, so maybe difference of log seed (otherwise known as ratio)?"
but then it felt wrong not to check. I plotted the level distribution and linear approximation seems really reasonable, so +1 also for absolute difference.
-
My match was an upset by seed, but we were the same level when we played (and I'm only in the 20s because I hadn't been playing much recently).
-
Thanks ednever, I'm looking in the list myself daily for upsets and hurray, I'm still the biggest upset. ::)
-
Interestingly these are all in the 40-50 over 15-25 range.
that's only because I didn't include the 'small upsets'
Not sure what the definition should be, but I didn't think it was really as interesting when a seed 32 wins over a seed 30 or something. I kind of just made judgement calls when I looked through the list.
Ed
-
Aww, it's nice to know people care.
I've played much less Dominion since the Goko debacle. I wonder how much of this list can be explained by long-time players having fallen away from the game.
I was shocked to see the Q's--Qvist and qmech--out so early.
You got two quick upvotes there. ;)
-
You still have quasi if you're looking for a q name to root for.
-
I imagine upset winners as reacting something like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKQOXYB2cd8
-
There's also the matter of some players like myself who play IRL more often than on Iso. I mean, when I entered this contest I hadn't played on iso since probably September. When I signed back in my level was down to 12, although I guess playing a few games got it up to 18 by the time seeding was determined.
-
I was upset by my first-round opponent and during our chat he mentioned how he hovered around L30 (where I am now) but hasn't really played since August. He didn't even know that iso was still up because he just heard about Goko's FAIL and stopped playing online entirely.
-
I imagine upset winners as reacting something like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKQOXYB2cd8
And the losers: http://www.nooooooooooooooo.com
-
After being (extremely minorly) upset, I thought about my Iso ranking. Man, I used to be level 32, but I haven't played very much for a while, so my rating plummeted... obviously I was underseeded. Right?
Or, maybe, just maybe, not playing nearly as much as before meant I'm not nearly as good a player as I was! (Which wasn't all that amazing to begin with.)
-
Sorry to derail this topic back to its original point. Debating what really constitutes skill is interesting, and had its place, but I had hoped this thread would be for small-time contenders like me to have a few moments of glory when they achieve something great.
I managed to edge past a 12 seed in a battle between a level 10 and a level 37. I'm stoked for round 2!
Round 1--shraeye beats cherdano 4-2.
Game 1 (cherdano-49 shraeye-36): http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201212/07/game-20121207-142301-c1a10fe3.html
I thought the winning strategy on this board would be Bazaars/Monuments and use Forge to turn estates into more Monuments to get them played. Cherdano gets more monuments though, and more treasure. I get behind at the start, and try to catch up by being fancy with Farmland; it just junks my deck and cherdano claims the win.
Game 2 (shraeye-49 cherdano-34): http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201212/07/game-20121207-144618-cdad0ff5.html
We both open silver/tournament on a Colony board. Mountebank features, and Lookout was our best trasher. I decide to buy an early Province and luck out as it hits and I pick up Followers to help the curse split (which I think I still lost, since I bought no Moats, and cherdano bought 3). Game ends on piles with curses/estates/tournament gone. My second to last turn, I had a scare, where I played Trusty steed for cards/actions, when just actions/+2$ would have sealed the win. I had to watch one more turn full of level2 Cities and cross my fingers.
Game 3 (cherdano-42 shraeye-44): http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201212/07/game-20121207-145850-7ca5d4f8.html
Both open Silver/Trader. I am thinking to go straight money, but pick up 2 labs and a market with $5 turns. Farmland is on this board as well. Near the end, we both avoided buying province on PPE rule, cherdano tries once, and I hit the 8 I need to win.
Game 4 (cherdano-25 shraeye-38): http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201212/07/game-20121207-151510-ab320810.html
Young Witch with Native Village as a bane. I use Warehouse for cycling. Cherdano opts for Black Market, and more fishing villages, trying to win curse split. Out of the Black Market he grabs an early wharf, and a witch as well. I buy mostly money (late trade route) and win despite curses. I had a last turn, where I remebered NOT to draw a card to my NV mat (which was empty), since my Warehouse and Trade Route hadn't come on that shuffle yet. It turns out Warehouse was next, and using that got me exactly the 8 I needed to finish.
Game 5 (cherdano-38 shraeye-26): http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201212/07/game-20121207-152623-55a530b0.html
Fishing Villages, Milita, Bishop. I tried too hard to get fancy with the Fishing Village stack, and use HoP as +buy to get these as well. Cherdano's more sensible strategy of buy gold, get 5 provinces ended up being stronger.
Game 6 (shraeye-42 cherdano resigns): http://dominion.isotropic.org/gamelog/201212/07/game-20121207-153712-69234934.html
Mining Village/Embassy with King's Court. Also pawns for +buys and Expand to turn Estates into crucial engine pieces. I probably didn't do this efficiently enough, as I get my 4th colony on Turn 17. but I hit 11$ early enough, that I went for getting Colonies over getting treasure. (colonies on turns 11/13/16/17, platinum on 14, gold on 16). Cherdano was using Apothecaries to line up his KC better, and may have gone double colony soon, but my go-for-the-throat strategy won out.
This was an awesome set of games, really my heart was beating like crazy the whole time; thanks cherdano!
-
Newest, biggest upset: shraeye (53) over Cherdano (12)
Updates a few more from the Gardens Division.
Ed
-
-snip-
I managed to edge past a 12 seed in a battle between a level 10 and a level 37. I'm stoked for round 2!
Congrats, Shraeye, and well done!
-
These ranks are for within the divisions. It's even more impressive to see overall seed differences.
-
Great job Shraeye
-
I just lost in the second round of the Chapel division to wesphys (38 seed). As a 6 seed, I believe that makes me the highest seed to have lost yet! At least I can be proud of something :'(
-
I just lost in the second round of the Chapel division to wesphys (38 seed). As a 6 seed, I believe that makes me the highest seed to have lost yet! At least I can be proud of something :'(
My condolences.
-
split the seed/ranking/etc discussion into a separate thread so that this one can simply discuss the upsets. first time wielding the mod stick like that, hopefully i didn't botch anything.
the split/new thread can be found here (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=5824.0).
-
Wingnut (44) upsets WHARF 2 THA BRIDGE (21). Wingnut draws fellow upsetter shraeye in the next round, so we have either a 44 or 53 seed through to the 3rd round over in the gardens division.
-
Wingnut (44) upsets WHARF 2 THA BRIDGE (21). Wingnut draws fellow upsetter shraeye in the next round, so we have either a 44 or 53 seed through to the 3rd round over in the gardens division.
Even more impressive because in my experience WHARF 2 THA BRIDGE is better than his rank shows because he will often go weeks or months without playing. Then again, maybe that rust in part caused the upset? Regardless, props to Wingnut.
-
I just lost in the second round of the Chapel division to wesphys (38 seed). As a 6 seed, I believe that makes me the highest seed to have lost yet! At least I can be proud of something :'(
Once you get to Round 2, nearly everyone has a mean skill at least in the 40+ range or defeated someone with a mean skill in that range, which makes luck much more able to overcome the skill gap.
I got bounced as a 3 seed in Round 2 last year.
-
In the 2nd round in the Thief division Simon (DK) (50) will play against Zappie (victory) (47). So far the match with the worst ranked best ranked player.
-
Uh, First got knocked out in the Chapel division. That's gotta be like a MASSIVE upset.
-
Uh, First got knocked out in the Chapel division. That's gotta be like a MASSIVE upset.
From what I can tell -Stef- is still in?
-
Uh, First got knocked out in the Chapel division. That's gotta be like a MASSIVE upset.
From what I can tell -Stef- is still in?
No, the player, "First." Not Stef.
-
Uh, First got knocked out in the Chapel division. That's gotta be like a MASSIVE upset.
Yeah, wow.
By far the closest I came to getting knocked out last year was playing against First. He, if not for a very stupid and totally avoidable mistake on his part, would have taken me out. Great player.
Though mith is a much much better player than the rankings would suggest, so there's some bad luck there, too.
-
5 seed eigensheep knocked out as well. That's 4-6 in Chapel, now.
-
This one got missed somehow in the Thief Division:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=5689.msg148619#msg148619
alex/werrew (52) over CopperCopperr (13)
alex/werrew has since moved through to the third round and will be playing lespeutere (4) or secret tunnel (29) soon.
-
Witch division keeps to be THE Upset Division:
dnkywin (23) won over dghunter79 (10) and Funkiemonk (24) won over WrathofGlod (Michael Harris) (9)
-
In total there were 33 upsets (defined as any lower seed defeating any higher seed) in Round 1, with 7 of them being in the top 64 overall (or in the top 16 in their bracket).
Chapel: 8 (1 in top 64)
Gardens: 9 (2 in top 64)
Thief: 9 (2 in top 64)
Witch: 7 (2 in top 64)
-
In total there were 33 upsets (defined as any lower seed defeating any higher seed) in Round 1, with 7 of them being in the top 64 overall (or in the top 16 in their bracket).
Chapel: 8 (1 in top 64)
Gardens: 9 (2 in top 64)
Thief: 9 (2 in top 64)
Witch: 7 (2 in top 64)
Curse you and your non-anecdotal evidence!
-
More non-anecdotal evidence...
Top upsets by level difference:
Chapel-1 witchdoctor83 d. kilgoretrout103 (30.148)
Gardens-1 shraeye d. cherdano (24.635)
Thief-1 alex d. Copperrcopper (21.666)
Chapel-2 mith d. First (20.598)
Chapel-2 Beyond Awesome d. eigensheep (20.38)
Witch-1 LordHedgie d. Qvist (20.335)
Thief-1 Simon d. sitnaltax (19.019)
Chapel-2 wesphys d. dudeabides (18.686)
Gardens1 bjmartin d. qmech (18.311)
Witch-1 LowPants d. Fumanchu (17.211)
Thief-1 mrdudesir d. oaster (15.579)
Thief-1 Zappie d. pecoho (15.523)
Witch-1 SirPeebles d. Powerman (15.209)
Top upsets by higher seed's level:
Chapel-2 mith d. First (43.756)
Chapel-2 Beyond Awesome d. eigensheep (43.393)
Chapel-2 wesphys d. dudeabides (40.894)
Chapel-1 witchdoctor83 d. kilgoretrout103 (39.472)
Witch-2 Funkiemonk d. WrathOfGlod (39.287)
Witch-2 dnkywin d. dghunter79 (38.705)
Gardens-1 shraeye d. cherdano (37.607)
Thief-1 alex d. Copperrcopper (36.5)
Witch-1 LordHedgie d. Qvist (36.259)
Thief-1 Simon d. sitnaltax (35.953)
Gardens-1 bjmartin d. qmech (35.586)
(I expect this will change as other divisions catch up on round 2... Chapel seems to be ahead of everyone there.)
-
Chapel-1 witchdoctor83 d. kilgoretrout103 (30.148)
This was a no-show, so it should not count for any contest. I am not even sure if I would call that an upset.
-
Ah, good to know. I was just going by the brackets, didn't think to check for forfeits.
-
I am reporting the LowPants (49) over Titandrake (16) upset before anyone else does.
On Iso LowPants is level 19, but his/her play felt more like the mid 30s.
-
I am reporting the LowPants (49) over Titandrake (16) upset before anyone else does.
On Iso LowPants is level 19, but his/her play felt more like the mid 30s.
And he's in the witch division. My confirmation bias senses are tingling.
-
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=5691.msg153262#msg153262
-
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=5691.msg153262#msg153262
So, 3, 4, 5, and 6 all got knocked out on the second match of the tournament. I would say at this rate, Chapel is the upset division.
-
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=5691.msg153262#msg153262
So, 3, 4, 5, and 6 all got knocked out on the second match of the tournament. I would say at this rate, Chapel is the upset division.
Now I want jonts to lose just to make that 2-6 :P
-
With a 4-2 win over Wingnut, I just became the lowest seed advancing to the third Round at #53!
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=5690.msg153268#msg153268
-
RisingJaguar is out. Seems like Round 2 is where all the upsets are.
-
RisingJaguar is out. Seems like Round 2 is where all the upsets are.
I guess this time around he couldn't...
[sunglasses]
...rise to the occasion.
-
RisingJaguar is out. Seems like Round 2 is where all the upsets are.
Ouch! Major shake up in the round two for sure.
-
RisingJaguar is out. Seems like Round 2 is where all the upsets are.
Alright, I'm officially scared.
Games tomorrow morning for me. We'll see if there's another upset...
-
With a 4-2 win over Wingnut, I just became the lowest seed advancing to the third Round at #53!
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=5690.msg153268#msg153268
And I am not surprised!
-
I guess once we get to round 3 it's very difficult to consider anything an upset any more. Anybody who has made it that far will have to have beaten at least one good player already.
-
RisingJaguar is out. Seems like Round 2 is where all the upsets are.
I guess this time around he couldn't...
[sunglasses]
...rise to the occasion.
This killed all the sadness from losing. :)
-
I guess once we get to round 3 it's very difficult to consider anything an upset any more. Anybody who has made it that far will have to have beaten at least one good player already.
Once we get through round 3, things stop becoming upsets and start becoming cinderallas.
-
RisingJaguar is out. Seems like Round 2 is where all the upsets are.
Alright, I'm officially scared.
Games tomorrow morning for me. We'll see if there's another upset...
And about that...
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=5688.msg154819#msg154819
-
RisingJaguar is out. Seems like Round 2 is where all the upsets are.
Alright, I'm officially scared.
Games tomorrow morning for me. We'll see if there's another upset...
And about that...
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=5688.msg154819#msg154819
I play in a couple of hours. I'm not liking this trend.
-
RisingJaguar is out. Seems like Round 2 is where all the upsets are.
Ouch! Major shake up in the round two for sure.
You should've better listened to Paul Gascoigne: "I never make predictions and I never will."
-
(http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/399/502/960.jpg)
-
With the current set-up in the Witch Bracket, a 24 seed or higher will be advancing to the Divisional Semifinals. That's quite the conglomeration of upsets all in the same area of the bracket.
-
Hey, you know that comment a while back about who you should fear more, a high seed or the person who upset the high seed?
I think the answer is the latter from the looks of things. Mostly because you have a lot less information on the latter's play.
-
With the current set-up in the Witch Bracket, a 24 seed or higher will be advancing to the Divisional Semifinals. That's quite the conglomeration of upsets all in the same area of the bracket.
I think you mean divisional quarterfinals.
-
With the current set-up in the Witch Bracket, a 24 seed or higher will be advancing to the Divisional Semifinals. That's quite the conglomeration of upsets all in the same area of the bracket.
I think you mean divisional quarterfinals.
shark_bait's right, there are randomname (32), Low Pants... (49), benjigab (25) and Funkiemonk (24). One of them will reach the divisional semis (BI).
-
With the current set-up in the Witch Bracket, a 24 seed or higher will be advancing to the Divisional Semifinals. That's quite the conglomeration of upsets all in the same area of the bracket.
I think you mean divisional quarterfinals.
shark_bait's right, there are randomname (32), Low Pants... (49), benjigab (25) and Funkiemonk (24). One of them will reach the divisional semis (BI).
Oh right. I got that, I just added an extra series somewhere. Nothing to see here.
-
RisingJaguar is out. Seems like Round 2 is where all the upsets are.
I guess this time around he couldn't...
[sunglasses]
...rise to the occasion.
This killed all the sadness from losing. :)
Glad I could help!!
-
Interestingly, despite significantly fewer upsets in the Thief division than anywhere else, the mean skill remaining is still second-lowest (with all divisions within a range of under 1.3).
On the other hand, the average seeds remaining are:
Witch 74.8
Chapel 71.4
Gardens 69.2
Thief 65.9
So the upset meter does indeed swing heavy toward Witch and away from Thief.
LowPants is the lowest mean skill to advance to Round 3 at just over 30, although mrdudesir is still alive in Round 2 with a mean skill of 26.2.
-
In total there were 33 upsets (defined as any lower seed defeating any higher seed) in Round 1, with 7 of them being in the top 64 overall (or in the top 16 in their bracket).
Chapel: 8 (1 in top 64)
Gardens: 9 (2 in top 64)
Thief: 9 (2 in top 64)
Witch: 7 (2 in top 64)
In Round 2 there were 18 total upsets, defined as any higher seed losing. Of those losses, there were 9 in the top 32 (or top 8 in the bracket), and 2 upsets where the losing player was an upsetter himself.
Chapel: 5 (4 in top 32)
Gardens: 5 (2 in top 32) (1 outside the top 64)
Thief: 2 (1 in top 32) (1 outside top 64)
Witch: 6 (2 in top 32)
-
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=5688.msg157298#msg157298
-
Interestingly, despite significantly fewer upsets in the Thief division than anywhere else, the mean skill remaining is still second-lowest (with all divisions within a range of under 1.3).
Why would you expect upsets to lower the mean skill?
-
LordHedgie is the new RisingJaguar
-
Of the six of us who have advanced to the fourth round so far, three of us were in the bottom half of the seeding and only Robz888 was expected to make it this far based on seed.
-
Of the six of us who have advanced to the fourth round so far, three of us were in the bottom half of the seeding and only Robz888 was expected to make it this far based on seed.
Naw, he was expected to lose last round too.
Edit: What I mean is, he was lower-rated than his last round opponent, julie.
-
I certainly expected me to lose, based on how well I usually do in tournaments...
-
What is the general feeling here? Are so many upsets (some huge!) happening because of a large contingent of skilled, but not previously well known players? Because of a mean skill v. level mismatch? Bad luck? Overconfidence? Something else?
-
I think the community as a whole is approaching the skill ceiling of Dominion, and as that happens it becomes harder for players to find things they know that not everyone knows that allows them to win.
I doubt that will be a popular opinion.
-
I think the community as a whole is approaching the skill ceiling of Dominion, and as that happens it becomes harder for players to find things they know that not everyone knows that allows them to win.
I doubt that will be a popular opinion.
This is all well and good until the community moves over to Goko and we have Dark Ages to deal with.
-
I was thinking it's combination of two main factors:
- Iso levels decay really quickly.
- There are fewer frequent Isotropic players as Goko waxes and Iso wanes.
I think we've got people who are pretty good at Dominion but their skill isn't represented in their Iso level, so the seeding is all over the place. Not that there's a clearly-better way to do it, given the circumstances.
-
I think the community as a whole is approaching the skill ceiling of Dominion, and as that happens it becomes harder for players to find things they know that not everyone knows that allows them to win.
I doubt that will be a popular opinion.
This is all well and good until the community moves over to Goko and we have Dark Ages to deal with.
Agreed. I think the introduction of Dark Ages play en masse into this currently iso-centric community will significantly Altar the perceived skill ceiling, spreading many of us out again.
8)
-
I think the community as a whole is approaching the skill ceiling of Dominion, and as that happens it becomes harder for players to find things they know that not everyone knows that allows them to win.
I doubt that will be a popular opinion.
This is all well and good until the community moves over to Goko and we have Dark Ages to deal with.
Agreed. I think the introduction of Dark Ages play en masse into this currently iso-centric community will significantly Altar the perceived skill ceiling, spreading many of us out again.
8)
I can say having played already over 500 games on Goko that there are still many DA cards that I don't fully understand, and one that I really struggle with even though I know it is a very powerful card. I'm looking at you Rebuild.
-
.
-
I think the community as a whole is approaching the skill ceiling of Dominion, and as that happens it becomes harder for players to find things they know that not everyone knows that allows them to win.
I doubt that will be a popular opinion.
This is all well and good until the community moves over to Goko and we have Dark Ages to deal with.
Agreed. I think the introduction of Dark Ages play en masse into this currently iso-centric community will significantly Altar the perceived skill ceiling, spreading many of us out again.
8)
So, what $5 are you gaining for trashing that ceiling?
-
I was thinking it's combination of two main factors:
- Iso levels decay really quickly.
- There are fewer frequent Isotropic players as Goko waxes and Iso wanes.
I think we've got people who are pretty good at Dominion but their skill isn't represented in their Iso level, so the seeding is all over the place. Not that there's a clearly-better way to do it, given the circumstances.
This (though I can't say how goko plays into it exactly - are any of the Cinderellas high in the rankings there?).
What pops says sounds reasonable, except that the ratings are what the ratings are - regardless of the knowledge difference, some players are winning almost all their games and reaching the top of the leaderboard, and some players aren't. Could be a matter of variance about the "mean skill" - low level player is rated where he is because he lacks consistency, but if he's playing well on a particular day he's outperforming his level considerably.
-
I think the community as a whole is approaching the skill ceiling of Dominion, and as that happens it becomes harder for players to find things they know that not everyone knows that allows them to win.
I doubt that will be a popular opinion.
This is all well and good until the community moves over to Goko and we have Dark Ages to deal with.
Agreed. I think the introduction of Dark Ages play en masse into this currently iso-centric community will significantly Altar the perceived skill ceiling, spreading many of us out again.
8)
So, what $5 are you gaining for trashing that ceiling?
Ummm, hello! Rebuild. What else from Dark Ages would I be gaining if I'm trashing my ceiling? ;)
-
I think the community as a whole is approaching the skill ceiling of Dominion, and as that happens it becomes harder for players to find things they know that not everyone knows that allows them to win.
I doubt that will be a popular opinion.
This is all well and good until the community moves over to Goko and we have Dark Ages to deal with.
Agreed. I think the introduction of Dark Ages play en masse into this currently iso-centric community will significantly Altar the perceived skill ceiling, spreading many of us out again.
8)
So, what $5 are you gaining for trashing that ceiling?
Ummm, hello! Rebuild. What else from Dark Ages would I be gaining if I'm trashing my ceiling? ;)
I suppose you cannot gain a Hovel. :( A fortress sounds like fun. Maybe some Rats? ???
Or, since things don't have to make sense, trash your ceiling and gain a Count! or a Duchy. ;)
-
Small-sample size. In several ways. First, Dominion has a lot of luck in it. Seven games isn't enough to wash that out, so you'll always see some 'upsets' that are more about card distribution than anything else. Second (and more importantly), it's a small tournament. A couple big upsets (Me, RJ, Marin) will make things seem really wacky, but don't ultimately mean a whole lot. We are primed to look for interesting results, so we ascribe more significance to the upsets. Have there really been a bunch more upsets this year compared to last?
I bet once it's all done, the number of upsets won't seem ALL that far out of line with expected results.
Oh, and I bet that a fair number of lower-ranked players could be 5-10 levels better if they really focused. Tournament games inspire that focus.
-
Small-sample size. In several ways. First, Dominion has a lot of luck in it. Seven games isn't enough to wash that out, so you'll always see some 'upsets' that are more about card distribution than anything else. Second (and more importantly), it's a small tournament. A couple big upsets (Me, RJ, Marin) will make things seem really wacky, but don't ultimately mean a whole lot. We are primed to look for interesting results, so we ascribe more significance to the upsets. Have there really been a bunch more upsets this year compared to last?
I bet once it's all done, the number of upsets won't seem ALL that far out of line with expected results.
Oh, and I bet that a fair number of lower-ranked players could be 5-10 levels better if they really focused. Tournament games inspire that focus.
First, are we actually seeing more upsets than last year? I'm a little guilty of jumping on the bandwagon since people were making a big deal about the upsets. I just assumed they were talking about "in comparison to last year" as it's our only other data point.
Second, how many games do you think would wash it out? To me, seven certainly feels like the better player should win the majority of the time. I'm curious if people have an opinion about this.
Overall, I don't think these "upsets" aren't really that upset-ful. I think we assign significance to them because they're unexpected - not because they're truly unlikely. I think the simplest explanation is that these lower-level players are actually good and would be higher level if they put the time in.
-
Giga, it depends on your winrate for each individual game. Someone with a 60% winrate will win a best of 7 ~71% of the time, someone with a 55% winrate will win a best of 7 ~61% of the time. The same numbers for a best of 51 would be ~92% and ~76.5%.
The number of upsets hasn't raised an eyebrow for me. Dominion is pretty high variance. There's also all the reasons previously mentioned ITT contributing to upsets happening. Some people probably are just really underseeded compared to their true skill relative the field.
-
Maybe what would work in the future is to have double eliminations. It is a little extra work, but it is easier to implement than say a Swiss system, and I think the amount of upsets would likely lessen.
-
I was thinking it's combination of two main factors:
- Iso levels decay really quickly.
- There are fewer frequent Isotropic players as Goko waxes and Iso wanes.
I think we've got people who are pretty good at Dominion but their skill isn't represented in their Iso level, so the seeding is all over the place. Not that there's a clearly-better way to do it, given the circumstances.
I think you're also missing (3) 7 games is actually a fairly short series. There's a fair bit of luck in Dominion, especially on weak boards. Even if you outplay your opponent on both of the high-complexity boards in a series, you can lose 4-2 by failing the coinflip on a bunch of BM+X boards.
Remember, Dominion variance is so high that Isotropic calculates TrueSkill by summarizing daily results rather than taking individual games. And the variance is furthermore board-dependent, which screws things up even more.
-
Giga, it depends on your winrate for each individual game. Someone with a 60% winrate will win a best of 7 ~71% of the time, someone with a 55% winrate will win a best of 7 ~61% of the time. The same numbers for a best of 51 would be ~92% and ~76.5%.
Well, yeah, I know more games is more accurate. No finite number of games would totally eliminate the luck, but there's a limit to what's feasible for a tournament, of course. :)
My question wasn't intended to be mathematical, though. I'm curious how many games players want to play per round. What's the right balances of feasible and satisfying (so that everybody's convinced that the winner consistently played better)? It may be everybody likes 7, but when olneyce called it out as not being enough to wash out the luck, I was just curious if he actually wanted more (which I guess was an assumption that he'd want to minimize luck...).
-
Giga, it depends on your winrate for each individual game. Someone with a 60% winrate will win a best of 7 ~71% of the time, someone with a 55% winrate will win a best of 7 ~61% of the time. The same numbers for a best of 51 would be ~92% and ~76.5%.
Well, yeah, I know more games is more accurate. No finite number of games would totally eliminate the luck, but there's a limit to what's feasible for a tournament, of course. :)
My question wasn't intended to be mathematical, though. I'm curious how many games players want to play per round. What's the right balances of feasible and satisfying (so that everybody's convinced that the winner consistently played better)? It may be everybody likes 7, but when olneyce called it out as not being enough to wash out the luck, I was just curious if he actually wanted more (which I guess was an assumption that he'd want to minimize luck...).
If you want to wash out luck, I would start at something like first to 10.
-
When I was playing seriously, I'd have done best of 31 no problem. These days playing 7 games seems like a struggle. I think 9 is probably a decent number balancing what people feel like playing vs the whole skill/luck thing, etc. A year ago I'd have said 13 probably.
-
7 games seems fine to me.
If you want to know who is currently the 'best' you can just look at the top of the leaderboard. We play the tournament because it's fun, not because it tells us the Truth. Which is to say: there SHOULD be some upsets, so trying to wash them all out is pointless.
In order to win the tournament, you have to be good. But in order to win, you also have to be lucky. That's true whether you're really the best, or whether you're merely one of the 15-20 best (like I was last year).
-
Yeah, 7 is a good number. I wouldn't want to go higher than 9. At some point you replace luck with endurance.
In order to win this tournament, you don't have to win one best of 7, you have to win eight.
-
Yeah, 7 is a good number. I wouldn't want to go higher than 9. At some point you replace luck with endurance.
In order to win this tournament, you don't have to win one best of 7, you have to win eight.
Yeah but you only have to lose one to get eliminated.
-
Yeah, at this point, I figure that advancing in the tournament is more or less a crapshoot. Better hope luck is on my side...
-
Yeah, 7 is a good number. I wouldn't want to go higher than 9. At some point you replace luck with endurance.
In order to win this tournament, you don't have to win one best of 7, you have to win eight.
Yeah but you only have to lose one to get eliminated.
Thus "single elimination tournament"...
-
I suspect if you wanted to give your tournament the best chance of selecting the best player for a given number of games, you're better off doing a multiple-elimination or Swiss style tournament with best-of-7 rather than a single elimination with best-of-[morethanthat]. I have absolutely no data to back that up, though. (Personally, I think trying to pick the absolute best player in a tournament for any game with a significant luck factor is futile, and I think the setup as-is does a fine job of selecting "one of the best players, who managed to get the best results over the course of the tournament". Whatever that means.)
Chapel division got awfully chalky this round... still time for some upsets in the bottom quarter, but I think we've lost any claim on being the "upset division".
-
The way I see it, and all sports fans know this secretly in their hearts: it's way more exciting when you don't know if the "better players" will win. The CL knockout stage is way more exciting than the league title; World Series Game 7 is way more exciting than baseball in June.
In my mind, there are probably 12-16 players that I would consider worthy of winning, with basically no differentiation between them as far as "deservingness". So long as the finalists (and ideally, division champs) are among those 12-16 I think we will have done enough.
-
Yeah, knock out adds to the drama. Upsets are awesome for non involved parties!
Otherwise might as well just give the award to the highest level play on Iso (yeah i know thats ot stictly right, but its the closest i can be bothered to come up with )
-
In my mind, there are probably 8-12 players that I would consider worthy of winning, with basically no differentiation between them as far as "deservingness". So long as the finalists (and ideally, division champs) are among those 8-12 I think we will have done enough.
And if someone wins that's not on that short list, they'll deserve it too. There's enough really good players in the tournament that you have to play really well and beat some really good players to win.
EDIT: Wow, you changed that number a lot. I first read 10-20, then quoted 8-12, now it says 12-16...
-
I put down 10-20 arbitrarily, then re-read the list, then changed my mind a second time :P
-
I put down 10-20 arbitrarily, then re-read the list, then changed my mind a second time :P
you must have done all that quickly, before you crossed that line-in-the-sand (timewise) that triggered the "Edited" flag. Or do you not get those, because you are....theory?
-
I put down 10-20 arbitrarily, then re-read the list, then changed my mind a second time :P
you must have done all that quickly, before you crossed that line-in-the-sand (timewise) that triggered the "Edited" flag. Or do you not get those, because you are....theory?
The "edited" flag is disabled for my own posts (though it will still show up if I edit other people's posts).
No wonder I am banned from all Forum Mafia games.
-
I put down 10-20 arbitrarily, then re-read the list, then changed my mind a second time :P
you must have done all that quickly, before you crossed that line-in-the-sand (timewise) that triggered the "Edited" flag. Or do you not get those, because you are....theory?
No wonder I am banned from all Forum Mafia games.
Your life outside of f.ds thanks you.
-
Of course, the one person who didn't lose in an upset was Stef. Of course.
-
Of course, the one person who didn't lose in an upset was Stef. Of course.
Unfortunately for -Stef-, any loss to anyone would be considered an upset, though losing to someone like Rabid would be much less upsetting than losing to FEEDMEMORE....
-
Of course, the one person who didn't lose in an upset was Stef. Of course.
Unfortunately for -Stef-, any loss to anyone would be considered an upset, though losing to someone like Rabid would be much less upsetting than losing to FEEDMEMORE....
I hear that guy is good.
-
It makes me feel better that my name was misspelled in the OP since the player who beat Marin was also misspelled. :)
-
I see it like golf, if you wanna see who's the best right now, check the leaderboard and it's gonna give you a pretty accurate idea of who's doing well.
And then you have this tournament, which is sadly our only Major, " almost " anybody can win it, it's for the glory, and even with whatever luck factor involved, the field is pretty deep ! It's a nice achievement you can be proud of if you manage to pull that off...
So my point is, let's do this more than once a year, it's too much fun ! : )
-
Of course, the one person who didn't lose in an upset was Stef. Of course.
Unfortunately for -Stef-, any loss to anyone would be considered an upset, though losing to someone like Rabid would be much less upsetting than losing to FEEDMEMORE....
http://www.councilroom.com/games_by_opponent?player=-Stef-
I think this makes me favourite :)
-
So my point is, let's do this more than once a year, it's too much fun ! : )
we sort of do already. the following tournaments (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Tournaments) organized by theory and/or this community have all taken place since last years DS.com championship:
Isodom 3
Isodom 4
Isodom 5
BGG Store Tournament
Dominion World Master's Online Qualifier
3 separate 1 day tournaments
-
Of course, the one person who didn't lose in an upset was Stef. Of course.
Unfortunately for -Stef-, any loss to anyone would be considered an upset, though losing to someone like Rabid would be much less upsetting than losing to FEEDMEMORE....
http://www.councilroom.com/games_by_opponent?player=-Stef-
I think this makes me favourite :)
I'm 5-0 (http://councilroom.com/games_by_opponent?player=Rabid) against the favourite! Does that make me the new favourite?
-
Reminds me of the Unofficial Football World Championships (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unofficial_Football_World_Championships). Currently the Unofficial Football World Champion is ... North Korea.
-
Ok, now I kinda want to write a script for councilroom to keep track of that... but the title list would be so long for something like Dominion...
-
Ok, now I kinda want to write a script for councilroom to keep track of that... but the title list would be so long for something like Dominion...
Probably it will just die, unfortunately, as someone stops playing or changes their name.
-
Ok, now I kinda want to write a script for councilroom to keep track of that... but the title list would be so long for something like Dominion...
Probably it will just die, unfortunately, as someone stops playing or changes their name.
We could probably have a grace period of a few months, if that player doesn't play within that time he gives up his title to whoever had it before.
-
Over the number of games and title changes we're talking about, yeah, pretty likely. Of course, you could just revert to previous holder in that case.
[ninja'd by Axxle - I wouldn't even make it a few months though, I'd make it the same week that it takes to fall off the leaderboard]
-
you'd need it to be recursive. If A beats B, and then B beats C, and then B/C never play again, does it go back to A?
-
Reminds me of the Unofficial Football World Championships (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unofficial_Football_World_Championships). Currently the Unofficial Football World Champion is ... North Korea.
I can't believe N Korea have been unbeaten for a year!!
-
In Asia they are quite decent team, one of the 5-6 strongest. Out of the title defence games only Australia was an opponent at a similar level, other teams were weaker.
-
you'd need it to be recursive. If A beats B, and then B beats C, and then B/C never play again, does it go back to A?
I think you mean B beats A and C beats B, but either way, that's what I was thinking... basically, any time you reach a dead end, back track to the previous title change match, mark it as ignored, and then proceed as normal. So here, it would go back to the C vs. B match first, mark it as ignored, and then try to go forward with B as a champ, but when it dead ends again it would then back track to B vs. A.
-
mrdudesir number 48 in his bracket defeated Manzi!
-
So now all of last year's top 3 are gone. However, all of the top 5 seeds based on leaderboard ranking (Stef, Rabid, ObiWan, Mic Q, and jonts) remain.
-
Also WanderingWinder & lespeutere have increased in level over the last few weeks.
So that makes all of today's top 7 still in, with about 32 players still in the event.
-
None of you play each other until the elite eight, either. If it all goes chalk until then:
(3) -Stef-
(7) jonts26
(6) lespeutere
(2) Rabid
(4) WanderingWinder
(1) Mic Qsenoch
(16) shark_bait
(5) Obi Wan Bonogi
We're also down to three left from last year's final 16. Two of them are on that list... >_>
-
Well, it was kind of expected from WW to rise in levels again, I guess. With regard to me, I'm sticking out of this gang of 7 (at the bottom) as I'm only that high on the board due to my new way to game the system (my skill + 2 < everybody else's skill).
-
C'mon Sharky, dont let me down! Ozle needs a new pair of shoes!
-
C'mon Sharky, dont let me down! Ozle needs a new pair of shoes!
You guys placing bets down there in the forum games?