GameFAQs Contests
Contest Stats and Discussion - Part 1041
From: creativename | #199 You're a pretty stubborn fella yourself, you realize. --- http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2011/8/22/2094c2de-bae8-4f5b-9f27-67eaff0aaeaf.jpg |
 |
Uh, why not? Different example; here's an easy comparison that makes Red look about as good as Cloud before their match even happens: http://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/index.html?poll=4555 http://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/index.html?poll=4564 http://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/index.html?poll=4547 http://www.gamefaqs.com/poll/index.html?poll=4560 All you have to assume is that Fox/Wolf beats Pac-man/Blinky and maybe (although not necessarily) that there was some overlap in FF7/MGS1 (which has been brought up many times in the past) and bam. Close match. This is to say nothing about Mario/Cloud, where Mario just plain looked a lot better all contest. Heck, he's doing a lot better today, even. Gets a better % on Link than Cloud despite being Nintendo SFF. --- Black Turtle did a pretty good job. |
Mario
vs Bowser beat Cloud vs Sephiroth with like... I don't know, 55.14% or
something. A small enough difference that it's fairly irrelevant.
Because with no rallying Cloud vs Seph probably only beat Trainers with
like 50.50%. A lot of the Cloud/Seph slowing down was a result of trend
shifting into the ASV rather than rallying. --- No problem! This is a cute and pop genocide of love! |
You people argue about the dumbest s***, Jesus Christ. To quote Ulti, "lol x-stats." --- Current Let's Play: Final Fantasy IV (FF2US) http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3445328 |
From: Lopen | #960 Again, if you don't care to discuss contest stats, I'm not sure what you're here to discuss. And yes these stats are utterly useless and no one gives a damn about this contest as a whole because it was CRAP. And thus no one really cares about stats. But I'm trying to figure out what a reasonable adjustment number would be, and getting attitude for it. In the contest stats topic. Just weird ****. From: LeonhartFour | #1001 How an I being stubborn while being realistic and logical? To say that the Trainers had static strength across the MvB and FF7 matches is just...I mean I really don't want to insult people so I won't say anything, other than it's an unreasonable mistake. They did not have static strength across those matches. --- www.gamefaqscontests.com www.gamefaqscontests.com/gallery |
I
mean hell while we're at it can we adjust Dante up a fraction of a
percent? Because Sora unnaturally stalled him for like 2 hours in the
dead hours/morning vote. And can we adjust Sora up against Squall in
the same fashion? Sweet now we have Dante > Squall. Just as planned. In a close match there's always unnatural stalling for the eventual winner. That's just how it works. Making an exception this time is just stubbornly not wanting Cloud < Trainers in the stats. --- No problem! This is a cute and pop genocide of love! |
From: creativename | #205 Well, I'm just saying that I'm personally not going to do anything. As I said, if anyone else wants to do it, feel free, but it ultimately changes nothing. The only purpose for making an adjustment is to put the top four into your own perceived order. It has little bearing on the other 60 pairings. --- http://i848.photobucket.com/albums/ab48/Leonhart4/Squall.jpg |
Link
is clearly rSFFing Mario. Let's adjust the x-stats so that
Mario/Bowser gets 80% on Link/Ganondorf and be through with this. --- Current Let's Play: Final Fantasy IV (FF2US) http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3445328 |
Ike/Black Knight > Link/Ganon I approve this. --- http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh293/zukiraphaera/war-sig-1.png http://i.imgur.com/597oi.png |
From: creativename | #205 Oh good, you realized what makes you pretty stubborn in this post. You're pretty condescending toward people who disagree with your reasoning and logic. --- http://i43.tinypic.com/dgwh0.gif http://www.majhost.com/gallery/atukam/OHWD/snownd.gif |
From: LeonhartFour | #1007 I don't give a crap about top 4 in proper order. Trainers>FF7. What I would do is put the Trainers in the #3 spot, as that is their strength at "full potential", but adjust the rest of the Mario vs. Bowser half, including Mario vs. Bowser. Assuming Trainers in Mario vs. Bowser equal the Trainers in FF7 puts Mario vs. Bowser closer to Link vs. Ganondorf than they really are. --- www.gamefaqscontests.com www.gamefaqscontests.com/gallery |
From: creativename | #211 Oh good. Then no need for adjustments. --- http://i52.tinypic.com/2zfiu09.gif http://i54.tinypic.com/10729w2.gif |
Because
no match worth adjusting in the Series Contest affected the top tier,
or half the entries in the contest, or could be so well defended by
timely evidence. Both contests suck, and I voted for Cloud/Seph as well. This contest's just the one with a match that fills many of the gaps x-stats fail to fill, so why not use it? The stats are almost always ugly anyway. --- http://img812.imageshack.us/img812/3492/eponaharr.jpg Nominate E P O N A. |
Seems like both sides can claim no adjustments given that we have 2 routes to extrapolated through. --- 2002 Link, 2003 Cloud, 2004 Link, 2005 Link, 2006 Link, 2008 Link, 2010 Link, 2011 Cloud. Link 6, Cloud 2 |
From: HaRRicH | #213 It fills one. The ordering of Trainers/Cloud. --- http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/8718/leonflowchart.png |
Is
Mario/Bowser vs Red/Blue even a usable result? Red/Blue are Pokemon but
they still might have gotten SFF'd and Red/Blue vs Cloud/Sephiroth
could be right without implying Mario/Bowser get 55% on Cloud/Sephiroth. --- Pokemon VGC2011 US Nationals - 54th place Pokemon VGC2012 NW Regional - 16th place |
Looking
at your Oracle percentage for this match, you basically just used Mario
vs Link from 2002 as your prediction for this match. To me that screams out that you didn't "get" that Mario was stronger in this format so obviously you're going to fight adjusting him up significantly every step of the way. So what I'm saying is you're trying too hard to make this contest line up with previous contests, not realizing it is in fact a different format. (No, don't look at my Oracle prediction, I put Mario vs Bowser trying to hype an upset) --- No problem! This is a cute and pop genocide of love! |
If someone is going to adjust Mario/Pokemon for SFF then they're going to adjust Trainers/Samus for SFF. (they won't) --- http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh293/zukiraphaera/war-sig-1.png http://i.imgur.com/597oi.png |
From: LeonhartFour | #1010 But anyone who thinks that the Trainers had static strength across those two matches is clearly mistaken because the Trainers got a lot of rallied votes in the FF7 match they didn't get in the MvB match, so why do you say I'm being stubborn by having that stance? Having the obvious, common sense stance isn't being "stubborn". Again, entrants strength can and does vary from match to match. Like L-Block. That's blatantly what happened with the Trainers here. That stance is reasonable. Having that stance is not being "stubborn". --- www.gamefaqscontests.com www.gamefaqscontests.com/gallery |
From: WarThaNemesis2 | #218 Hey, I'll adjust it until we get Bosses > Snakes (if we don't have that result already, I haven't looked recently)! --- http://i.imgur.com/CbfFb.jpg |
What makes the most sense to me (haven't read this debate too closely yet): 1. Mario's value is what he ends up with against Link today. 1 SFF match, no way to adjust it. 2. Cloud's value is what he got on Link. Obvious. 3. Pokemon gets extrapolated through Cloud/Sephiroth, because that's not an SFF match, while Red/Mario is. If anyone wants to do calculations to figure out how much C/S beat the Trainers by without rallying, that's fine too. --- 2002 Link, 2003 Cloud, 2004 Link, 2005 Link, 2006 Link, 2008 Link, 2010 Link, 2011 Cloud. Link 6, Cloud 2 |
From: creativename | #219 Here it is again. Anyone who doesn't see things the way you "clearly and obviously" see them is being stubborn and they're just plain wrong. You're very dogmatic in a lot of your arguments. --- http://i43.tinypic.com/dgwh0.gif http://www.majhost.com/gallery/atukam/OHWD/snownd.gif |
I
seriously question how many 'rallied votes' Trainers got. Cloud/Seph
making a 200+ vote comeback in the middle of the ASV is far more
suspicious than Trainers stalling during a time period where FF7's
strongest voter base is asleep. --- Black Turtle did a pretty good job. |
The
main problem with the x-stats is that either method you guys use, it'll
fail to take into account X/Zero having the most ridiculous rSFFing
match ever, when in all actuality Bartz/Gilgamesh are supposed to get
90% on them due to data. I think if you guys made this proper
adjustment, you'll see the x-stats will fall comfortably in line, with
Guybrush/LeChuck being the #2 spot they obviously deserve. Alternately, why not just make two different sets of x-stats? --- Current Let's Play: Final Fantasy IV (FF2US) http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3445328 |
From: creativename | #219 And again, you're massively overrating the rallied votes. That match does not turn into a 54-46 without rallied votes. It's probably like 50.50-49.50. In which case it falls so close that you're hitting the territory that all matches that close hit. Without close match rallying from bracket people Dante probably beats Sora, but I'm not going to argue that you adjust Dante up. --- No problem! This is a cute and pop genocide of love! |
I
seriously question how many 'rallied votes' Trainers got. Cloud/Seph
making a 200+ vote comeback in the middle of the ASV is far more
suspicious than Trainers stalling during a time period where FF7's
strongest voter base is asleep. If you mean the SNV, FFVII has always been very strong there. For many years it was its strongest time in fact. --- 2002 Link, 2003 Cloud, 2004 Link, 2005 Link, 2006 Link, 2008 Link, 2010 Link, 2011 Cloud. Link 6, Cloud 2 |
From: KamikazePotato | #223 Not really. If Cloud/Sephiroth is naturally stronger than the Trainers, they can still go up even if the Trainers do better during the ASV. Besides, Red/Blue have been so frontloaded this contest that it's negatively impacted their trends across the board, including the ASV. --- http://i.minus.com/iH9vIGOBoyTQ2.gif |
Looking
at your Oracle percentage for this match, you basically just used Mario
vs Link from 2002 as your prediction for this match. To me that screams out that you didn't "get" that Mario was stronger in this format so obviously you're going to fight adjusting him up significantly every step of the way. So what I'm saying is you're trying too hard to make this contest line up with previous contests, not realizing it is in fact a different format. (No, don't look at my Oracle prediction, I put Mario vs Bowser trying to hype an upset) It's an SFF match. It doesn't necessarily mean you misjudged the characters strength. It could mean you misjudged the amount of SFF. My Oracle is way out because I misjudged the amount of SFF. If the final wasn't a SFF match, I probably would have gone with exactly what the third place match would call for a result or something very close to it. --- Pokemon VGC2011 US Nationals - 54th place Pokemon VGC2012 NW Regional - 16th place |
WarThaNemesis2 posted... If someone is going to adjust Mario/Pokemon for SFF then they're going to adjust Trainers/Samus for SFF. (they won't) Samus > Fighters, just as planned. --- "I am riding the Poke-wave, using the metaphorical Surf and hopping on my Blastoise, all the way to Mario vs Bowser." - RPGLord |
Besides,
Red/Blue have been so frontloaded this contest that it's negatively
impacted their trends across the board, including the ASV. And I'm okay with trends being weird, but going 'Trends are weird? Pokemon rallied a million votes!' is silly when FF7 was just as suspicious at times. --- Black Turtle did a pretty good job. |
From: Team Rocket Elite | #228 Yeah but then it raises the question of why you'd expect Link to SFF Mario more here when the strength of the two entrants is pretty likely closer here than it was in 2002. I kinda thought that 55-60 should be the favored percentage in this match by a lot. I think the only reason it wasn't is because people look too hard at previous stats. --- No problem! This is a cute and pop genocide of love! |
KamikazePotato | Posted 12/20/2011 8:21:33 PM | message detail | quote I seriously question how many 'rallied votes' Trainers got. Cloud/Seph making a 200+ vote comeback in the middle of the ASV is far more suspicious than Trainers stalling during a time period where FF7's strongest voter base is asleep. Vote totals at 12:00 PM: Trainers/Cloud - 31659 Trainers/Fighters - 31161 Even at the half-way point in the match, it looked like Trainers/Cloud would fall just short of 60000 votes. Instead, Trainers/Cloud goes on to 63000 votes. That might give you an idea on the number of rallied votes in the match, but not all of them are for the Trainers. I'm sure Cloud got rallied votes as well. --- Luster Soldier --- ~Shield Bearer~ | ~Data Analyst~ Popular at school, but not as cool as BlAcK TuRtLe, Guru Champ! |
And
I'm okay with trends being weird, but going 'Trends are weird? Pokemon
rallied a million votes!' is silly when FF7 was just as suspicious at
times. When has FF7 ever rallied anything in the past? --- 2002 Link, 2003 Cloud, 2004 Link, 2005 Link, 2006 Link, 2008 Link, 2010 Link, 2011 Cloud. Link 6, Cloud 2 |
Even
at the half-way point in the match, it looked like Trainers/Cloud would
fall just short of 60000 votes. Instead, Trainers/Cloud goes on to
63000 votes. That might give you an idea on the number of rallied votes
in the match, but not all of them are for the Trainers. I'm sure Cloud
got rallied votes as well. So, for those 3000 extra votes, let's put a guess at 2500 for Trainers and 500 for C/S, giving us a net gain of 2000 for Pokemon. Seems about as reasonable as anything else. --- 2002 Link, 2003 Cloud, 2004 Link, 2005 Link, 2006 Link, 2008 Link, 2010 Link, 2011 Cloud. Link 6, Cloud 2 |
I bet you there was a good amount of rallying in Vincent/Crono. Vincent vs Squall too. Basically the reason FF7 hasn't rallied in the past is it very rarely needs to. --- No problem! This is a cute and pop genocide of love! |
From: Lopen | #1057 Dude, I wasn't even paying attention in the Oracle for the last few matches because I'd lost interest in this contest. That's why I used the 2K2 percentage - so I wouldn't have to use my brain. Don't try to psycho-analyze too deeply into it. That was just me being lazy. From: Lopen | #1057To me that screams out that you didn't "get" that Mario was stronger in this format so obviously you're going to fight adjusting him up significantly every step of the way. But...I...am adjusting him up. The "no adjustments" people are the ones that say leave him where he is, which is almost equal to Cloud/Seph. From: Lopen | #1057So what I'm saying is you're trying too hard to make this contest line up with previous contests, not realizing it is in fact a different format. What? I don't even get where you're getting this from. The *only* thing I'm saying is that the Trainers did not have static strength across those two matches. Literally everything supports this. Odd trends, higher vote totals, constant barriers, the Trainers constantly leading by juuuust enough - everything. It's blatant. It boggles my mind that someone could not see this, or try to argue against it. Arguing against it is - and really, I don't mean offense and don't want to make anyone mad, just being honest - deluded. The Trainers at "full potential" are greater than FF7. Thus I will rank them 3. (apparently ranking them 4 would insult people around here, not that I'd rank them 4 anyway since they *won* the 3rd place match) But the Trainers were not at full potential in the MvB match. From: Lopen | #1057(No, don't look at my Oracle prediction, I put Mario vs Bowser trying to hype an upset) So I don't get to psycho-analyze you then based on something silly? Seems unfair :) --- www.gamefaqscontests.com www.gamefaqscontests.com/gallery |
From: Lopen | #235 That cheat...! --- http://i52.tinypic.com/2zfiu09.gif http://i54.tinypic.com/10729w2.gif |
Are we seriously arguing whether Cloud/Sephiroth should have won by about 51% instead of going 50% Trainers looked no better against Cloud/Sepiroth than Mario/Bowser. --- BOP Results: http://www.freewebs.com/charmander6000/Rivalry%20BOP.xls Rivalry Rumble: 117/160 Today: Cloud/Sephiroth |
Pokemon
probably rallied more votes because its an easier target for that sort
of thing, but the idea that FF7 didn't rally any and that Pokemon's
rallying utterly dwarfed FF7's doesn't make much sense to me. --- Black Turtle did a pretty good job. |
I bet you there was a good amount of rallying in Vincent/Crono. Vincent vs Squall too. Vincent didn't need any rallying in Vincent/Crono 2007. If he was rallied in 2008 and still achieved that result, then I think we can award FFVII fans the worst ralliers ever award. In which case it'd be a drop in the bucket next to Pokemon's rally power. --- 2002 Link, 2003 Cloud, 2004 Link, 2005 Link, 2006 Link, 2008 Link, 2010 Link, 2011 Cloud. Link 6, Cloud 2 |
From: red sox 777 | #234 And even using this very generous approximation Cloud vs Seph only wins with 51.3%. I think a more realistic would be 2000:1000 but yeah. Point is this is bordering "who cares" territory. It's nowhere near 54% as I believe CN said earlier. --- No problem! This is a cute and pop genocide of love! |
From: charmander6000 | #238 This isn't a joking matter. Tens of x-stat values are at stake! --- Current Let's Play: Final Fantasy IV (FF2US) http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3445328 |
The
*only* thing I'm saying is that the Trainers did not have static
strength across those two matches. Literally everything supports this.
Odd trends, higher vote totals, constant barriers, the Trainers
constantly leading by juuuust enough - everything. It's blatant. Congrats, you just described any close match. I think Lopen's 50.5% is about right. If Cloud/Seph are 'truly' worth a higher value on the Trainers, it isn't going higher than that. --- Black Turtle did a pretty good job. |
This
would be out of the blue, but I'd like to see Mario vs. Cloud for the
bonus match. So I can quit following these contests if Cloud loses. --- 2002 Link, 2003 Cloud, 2004 Link, 2005 Link, 2006 Link, 2008 Link, 2010 Link, 2011 Cloud. Link 6, Cloud 2 |
Mario > Cloud would have been my upset special for the next character battle, now I feel it may be the favourite. --- BOP Results: http://www.freewebs.com/charmander6000/Rivalry%20BOP.xls Rivalry Rumble: 117/160 Today: Cloud/Sephiroth |
creativename | Posted 12/20/2011 8:20:13 PM | message detail | quote But anyone who thinks that the Trainers had static strength across those two matches is clearly mistaken because the Trainers got a lot of rallied votes in the FF7 match they didn't get in the MvB match, so why do you say I'm being stubborn by having that stance? Having the obvious, common sense stance isn't being "stubborn". Trainers were more likely to be bandwagoned against Mario/Bowser to keep themselves from being eliminated from the contest. The primary argument against rallying in Trainers/Cloud is that it's a third place match that isn't even part of the contest, so there's no incentive to push the Trainers over Cloud. Not_Wylvane | Posted 12/20/2011 8:22:30 PM | message detail | quote Alternately, why not just make two different sets of x-stats? That's possible. The raw x-stats wouldn't be based off of the Trainers/Cloud match, while the adjusted ones would be. red sox 777 | Posted 12/20/2011 8:23:22 PM | message detail | quote If you mean the SNV, FFVII has always been very strong there. For many years it was its strongest time in fact. I think that was back when we still had a 3:00 AM start time, which makes the SNV more powerful. --- Luster Soldier --- ~Shield Bearer~ | ~Data Analyst~ Popular at school, but not as cool as BlAcK TuRtLe, Guru Champ! |
From: LeonhartFour | #1102 Look. Can you please point out very specifically where I'm being "dogmatic"? It's dogmatic to realize the Trainers didn't have the same strength across those two matches? How can one even reasonably argue otherwise when looking at the match? I'm being called dogmatic for stating the obvious. This whole thing is getting farcical :\ From: KamikazePotato | #1103 No, FF7 sans-rallying being stronger than the Trainers during the ASV makes sense, even though in relative terms that is the Pokemon's stronger time. But without rallying they probably are losing that time period in absolute terms. From: KamikazePotato | #1110And I'm okay with trends being weird, but going 'Trends are weird? Pokemon rallied a million votes!' is silly when FF7 was just as suspicious at times. FF7 being rallied? Now we're really going off the rails :P Any amount of rallying for FF7 would be trivial compared to the Pokemon rallying. You know that. The Pokemon simply have much more rallying potential, which is why they are the stronger duo head-to-head, and the true #3 of the contest. --- www.gamefaqscontests.com www.gamefaqscontests.com/gallery |
Man I read KP's post about the close match and I assumed it was by some no name. Creative you are slipping my friend. --- Ngirl is a toll bridge - Wigs Gotta pay if you want to come inside! - Ngirl |
From: red sox 777 | #1154 Yes, sound reasonable enough. Thank you for being able to have a reasonable discussion of the issue. You have no idea how much I appreciate that at this point :) From: Lopen | #1201Point is this is bordering "who cares" territory. Indeed. You are free to stop posting about the subject. From: Lopen | #1201It's nowhere near 54% as I believe CN said earlier. You misread me, I said it looked like they were headed for a 54%ish second half. Which would end up with them getting 52% overall. But Luster says I was overshooting it. --- www.gamefaqscontests.com www.gamefaqscontests.com/gallery |
From: creativename | #247 This whole thing was farcical the minute you opened your mouth and started this bats*** insane derail. --- Current Let's Play: Final Fantasy IV (FF2US) http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3445328 |
