Page 1 of 1
Better Stats
Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2009 8:13 pm
by negatron
Does anyone have a better bunch of stats then PPTH, P/N, and bonus conversion to rank teams and players?
These statistics breakdown because of failing to account for field difficulty and because bonus conversion can potentially be on the basis of one bonus, which would give an unrealistic idea of how well a team can do. (Okay, so we did slaughter them 640-40, but they converted bonuses better!). Also, teams do not always have the same composition at each event. Any ideas?
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2009 8:32 pm
by cvdwightw
1. Presumably the new S-value, once released, will be better than anything currently available.
2. Don't knock bonus conversion. It's opponent-independent, and thus makes comparisons easy without accounting for field strength. As long as your sample size isn't so ridiculously small that you're actually trying to compare the team that 30'd Duck Hunt/Super Mario Bros./Punch Out with the team that got the other 19 bonuses, or trying to compare the team that got five ass-hard EuroFest bonuses in a row with a team that had a more even distribution (i.e. you're doing it over the course of a tournament, when presumably bonus variability averages out), it's a pretty good indicator of relative team strength.
3. We're waiting for BeES to show up, so we can compute fun stuff like words per buzz and the derived Player Subject Ratings.
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2009 8:54 pm
by Wall of Ham
Quizbowler Created Stats
Most of them are for individual stats, and seem difficult to calculate by hand though.
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:23 pm
by BuzzerZen
cvdwightw wrote:
3. We're waiting for BeES Godot to show up
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:46 pm
by Whiter Hydra
BuzzerZen wrote:cvdwightw wrote:
3. We're waiting for BeES Godot to show up with Duke Nukem Forever
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2009 9:47 pm
by Kouign Amann
BuzzerZen wrote:cvdwightw wrote:
3. We're waiting for BeES Godot to show up
Yeah, seriously, when is BeES coming out? It sounds really cool, and I'd love to see it in action.
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:02 pm
by at your pleasure
Yeah, seriously, when is BeES coming out? It sounds really cool, and I'd love to see it in action.
Quite possibly, when
nationals is decided on a question on
The Sot-Weed Factor.
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:36 pm
by The Logic of Scientific Disco
Anti-Climacus wrote:
Quite possibly, when
nationals is decided on a question on
The Sot-Weed Factor.
An alternative name for marijuana is pot. For the championship and a pack of chocolate cigarettes, an alternative name for tobacco appears in the name of what John Barth work?
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Wed Jun 10, 2009 12:39 am
by #1 Mercury Adept
Anti-Climacus wrote:Quite possibly, when
nationals is decided on a question on
The Sot-Weed Factor.
To get first dibs on an audio bonus on household appliances manufactured in Texas (hey, look! A Texas team on the panel! These questions were written months in advance, folks!), answer this pyramidal tossup: anagram "Theta screwed foot" into a Barth title.
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:06 pm
by rjaguar3
Might as well announce it here, and not as a competitor to BeES, but I have been developing a question-reading program called JAGUARS ("[insert programmer whose first name starts with "J"] and Greg's User-friendly Automated Reading System). As soon as I can get a handle on doing a platform-independent GUI, I'll give it my best shot.
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:45 pm
by grapesmoker
rjaguar3 wrote:Might as well announce it here, and not as a competitor to BeES, but I have been developing a question-reading program called JAGUARS ("[insert programmer whose first name starts with "J"] and Greg's User-friendly Automated Reading System). As soon as I can get a handle on doing a platform-independent GUI, I'll give it my best shot.
I'm a programmer whose name starts with J!
I'm also working on a scorekeeping system; it uses Python bindings for Qt, which is platform independent. Right now, I'm at the stage where one can successfully enter teams, players, and keep track of scores, as well as export the information in an XML file. I've contemplated adding question-reading as a feature, but for various reasons relating to having to parse Word files, this is a nontrivial thing to do.
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Wed Jun 10, 2009 7:28 pm
by rjaguar3
grapesmoker wrote:rjaguar3 wrote:Might as well announce it here, and not as a competitor to BeES, but I have been developing a question-reading program called JAGUARS ("[insert programmer whose first name starts with "J"] and Greg's User-friendly Automated Reading System). As soon as I can get a handle on doing a platform-independent GUI, I'll give it my best shot.
I'm a programmer whose name starts with J!
I'm also working on a scorekeeping system; it uses Python bindings for Qt, which is platform independent. Right now, I'm at the stage where one can successfully enter teams, players, and keep track of scores, as well as export the information in an XML file. I've contemplated adding question-reading as a feature, but for various reasons relating to having to parse Word files, this is a nontrivial thing to do.
Actually, I'm starting work with QBML files (I have a sample one based on Aegis kickoffs that I am trying to work with). The idea is to modify the files as games are played by inserting buzz tags into the file at the appropriate points, creating a modified file that a different module will be able to read to keep score, compile stats, and generate matches.
Other modules I'm working on include a program to directly enter and manipulate questions and convert questions from QBML to OpenOffice, and from OpenOffice to QBML.
When this is all completed, I plan to release it for free under cc-by-sa.
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:25 pm
by grapesmoker
rjaguar3 wrote:Actually, I'm starting work with QBML files (I have a sample one based on Aegis kickoffs that I am trying to work with). The idea is to modify the files as games are played by inserting buzz tags into the file at the appropriate points, creating a modified file that a different module will be able to read to keep score, compile stats, and generate matches.
Other modules I'm working on include a program to directly enter and manipulate questions and convert questions from QBML to OpenOffice, and from OpenOffice to QBML.
When this is all completed, I plan to release it for free under cc-by-sa.
That's a great plan. As someone who has explored the various options for how to achieve this, my advice is to keep in mind that whatever you do, you have to make it so that people can essentially plug and chug from Word; this is quite difficult to do and I've yet to find an elegant solution for it, so if you figure it out, let me know.
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:39 pm
by BuzzerZen
grapesmoker wrote:That's a great plan. As someone who has explored the various options for how to achieve this, my advice is to keep in mind that whatever you do, you have to make it so that people can essentially plug and chug from Word; this is quite difficult to do and I've yet to find an elegant solution for it, so if you figure it out, let me know.
Jerry, just demand plain-text submissions for your next event. People will deal. This would be my plan if I were ever foolhardy enough to edit a tournament.
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:52 pm
by grapesmoker
BuzzerZen wrote:Jerry, just demand plain-text submissions for your next event. People will deal. This would be my plan if I were ever foolhardy enough to edit a tournament.
If I thought that would work I would have done it already.
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 12:00 am
by Matt Weiner
the world should conform to the needs of my computer program instead of the other way around because ______
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 12:24 am
by Mechanical Beasts
Matt Weiner wrote:the world should conform to the needs of my computer program instead of the other way around because the world of reasonably intelligent quizbowlers doesn't need Word and my computer program sure as hell does not
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 12:49 am
by Auks Ran Ova
everyday847 wrote:Matt Weiner wrote:the world should conform to the needs of my computer program instead of the other way around because the world of reasonably intelligent quizbowlers doesn't need Word and my computer program sure as hell does not
word is easy and I am lazy. convince me otherwise.
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 1:20 am
by Mechanical Beasts
Ukonvasara wrote:everyday847 wrote:Matt Weiner wrote:the world should conform to the needs of my computer program instead of the other way around because the world of reasonably intelligent quizbowlers doesn't need Word and my computer program sure as hell does not
word is easy and I am lazy. convince me otherwise.
When I copy/paste from Wikipedia into my questions, Notepad automatically removes links so my plagiarism is never cau--ohshit
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 2:45 am
by Auks Ran Ova
everyday847 wrote:Ukonvasara wrote:everyday847 wrote:Matt Weiner wrote:the world should conform to the needs of my computer program instead of the other way around because the world of reasonably intelligent quizbowlers doesn't need Word and my computer program sure as hell does not
word is easy and I am lazy. convince me otherwise.
When I copy/paste from Wikipedia into my questions, Notepad automatically removes links so my plagiarism is never cau--ohshit
sold
Re: Better Stats
Posted: Thu Jun 11, 2009 12:17 pm
by Not That Kind of Christian!!
Ukonvasara wrote:everyday847 wrote:Matt Weiner wrote:the world should conform to the needs of my computer program instead of the other way around because the world of reasonably intelligent quizbowlers doesn't need Word and my computer program sure as hell does not
word is easy and I am lazy. convince me otherwise.
Because
wants you to fight the man, Rob Carson!