Sim Engine Like Real Life Topic

a_in_the_b
Posts: 1653 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 18 666 3
Pro
Its a commonly used construction, COlonels. . .

1/17/2010 11:28 AM
schroedess26
Posts: 54 (0)
All Star
29 1 1
Prospect
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
1/17/2010 11:32 AM
dalter
Posts: 71 (0)
All Star
25
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 1/17/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 1/17/2010
More to the point, if it only happens occasionally, how are you differentiating between occasional randomness that's excessive or appropriate? To me, it would be excessive/inappropriate if it was preventing what I described above, which it clearly does not. How much randomness is too much for you?
When A. the game doesn't pass the "eye-test" and B. if there aren't logical explanations to justify what happened.

If it was proven that true randomness was used (which is highly unlikely because not many places/sites do) I would have shut up a long time ago and defended WIS on every last bizarre outlier....but it seemingly happens time and again....there's an entire thread in the NBA Sim forum dedicated to bizarre unjustifiable results.

There are results that happen in real life that would be "unjustifiable" or wouldn't pass the "eye test" if you just looked at the teams before the game. College of Charleston beat UNC a week ago ... I'm quite confident that would qualify. And that's not UVA-Chaminade from 25 years ago, it's the type of example that happens a bunch each season.

(Wisconsin beat Duke and Purdue, but lost to UWGB; Georgetown lost at home to Old Dominion; you get the idea.)

So again, I guess we need to figure out what "unjustifiable" means. I think there's very little that would actually meet a reasonable definition of that word. I think we're talking more about "out of the ordinary", and I do think it's possible that there are too many "out of the ordinary" occurrences.

But again, the central question is -- How many is too many? And how do you measure that?
1/17/2010 1:30 PM
schroedess26
Posts: 54 (0)
All Star
29 1 1
Prospect
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
1/17/2010 1:43 PM
dalter
Posts: 71 (0)
All Star
25
Prospect
Yeah -- kinda/sorta. But then what would you compare it to in HD? Certainly not the spreads here, those are beyond meaningless.
1/17/2010 1:45 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 1/17/2010
There are results that happen in real life that would be "unjustifiable" or wouldn't pass the "eye test" if you just looked at the teams before the game. College of Charleston beat UNC a week ago ... I'm quite confident that would qualify. And that's not UVA-Chaminade from 25 years ago, it's the type of example that happens a bunch each season. But there isn't some great sim up in the sky generating these results, these are human beings who essentially never do something the exact same way twice. Anything can happen in real life.

(Wisconsin beat Duke and Purdue, but lost to UWGB; Georgetown lost at home to Old Dominion; you get the idea.)

So again, I guess we need to figure out what "unjustifiable" means. I think there's very little that would actually meet a reasonable definition of that word. I think we're talking more about "out of the ordinary", and I do think it's possible that there are too many "out of the ordinary" occurrences.

But again, the central question is -- How many is too many? 1, if you have 1 case of extreme randomness, you have a problem. I have a very simple Home Run Derby game that I run with TRUE randomness via random.org. If 1959 Coot Veal beat 2001 Barry Bonds using true randomness, I'm fine with that...to me, anything is acceptable when you use true randomness, no matter how bad it looks. If I have to explain an event like this to people, I will...if they can't accept that a result like this happened and don't believe that I use true randomness, then tough, they're not worth my time. I'm basically asking people to take my word for it...WIS is asking to do the same, but they have a reputation with me that makes them not trustworthy to me. And how do you measure that? You can't measure it really...its a feel based on years of experience on this website.

1/17/2010 1:49 PM
dalter
Posts: 71 (0)
All Star
25
Prospect
I agree, it's feel. And so in large part, it comes down to expectation.

You seem to have an expectation that this game should have a fairly low degree of randomness -- certainly less randomness than real life. (I understand you are not calling for no randomness.)

Others may want more randomness than you do, or think that the degree of randomness we see is appropriate.

There is no right or wrong there. It's as much about your personal expectations as anything else.

I also think that if they fix some of the underlying issues w. in the sim, that will inherently serve to decrease randomness.
1/17/2010 1:53 PM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
What is the point of playing the game if everything is basically decided in recruiting? You are, once again, downplaying the ability of a coach to coach his players up in HD and win. Just like you did with your OTR ratings or whatever. If there is going to be so little randomness in the game then what is the point of game planning or even siming the games?
1/17/2010 1:56 PM
schroedess26
Posts: 54 (0)
All Star
29 1 1
Prospect
Its based on your feel for the game. If its based on feel then its your opinion not a fact, I could feel that any upset where a team is favored by 5 points is too much or that someone with an A FT shooting should always hit 95% or more each game. A bad RNG would be a fact. You could prove it with the numbers it spits out, end of story. If its the formulas they use to get the scores and how the game comes out then its a different story.
1/17/2010 1:57 PM
arssanguinus
Posts: 1120 (0)
Hall of Famer
282 1
Pro
Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 1/17/2010
Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 1/17/2010

There are results that happen in real life that would be "unjustifiable" or wouldn't pass the "eye test" if you just looked at the teams before the game. College of Charleston beat UNC a week ago ... I'm quite confident that would qualify. And that's not UVA-Chaminade from 25 years ago, it's the type of example that happens a bunch each season. But there isn't some great sim up in the sky generating these results, these are human beings who essentially never do something the exact same way twice. Anything can happen in real life.

(Wisconsin beat Duke and Purdue, but lost to UWGB; Georgetown lost at home to Old Dominion; you get the idea.)

So again, I guess we need to figure out what "unjustifiable" means. I think there's very little that would actually meet a reasonable definition of that word. I think we're talking more about "out of the ordinary", and I do think it's possible that there are too many "out of the ordinary" occurrences.

But again, the central question is -- How many is too many? 1, if you have 1 case of extreme randomness, you have a problem. I have a very simple Home Run Derby game that I run with TRUE randomness via random.org. If 1959 Coot Veal beat 2001 Barry Bonds using true randomness, I'm fine with that...to me, anything is acceptable when you use true randomness, no matter how bad it looks. If I have to explain an event like this to people, I will...if they can't accept that a result like this happened and don't believe that I use true randomness, then tough, they're not worth my time. I'm basically asking people to take my word for it...WIS is asking to do the same, but they have a reputation with me that makes them not trustworthy to me. And how do you measure that? You can't measure it really...its a feel based on years of experience on this website.

YOu really don't understand statistics, again, do you?
1/17/2010 2:02 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 1/17/2010What is the point of playing the game if everything is basically decided in recruiting? You are, once again, downplaying the ability of a coach to coach his players up in HD and win. Just like you did with your OTR ratings or whatever. If there is going to be so little randomness in the game then what is the point of game planning or even siming the games? I'm not advocating zero randomness...I thought that's been clear for a while now.
1/17/2010 2:10 PM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
1/17/2010 2:18 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By arssanguinus on 1/17/2010YOu really don't understand statistics, again, do you
What? Care to explain? FWIW, its still funny that you deny this alias despite your traditional first 2 caps style is in full effect here.
1/17/2010 2:18 PM
a_in_the_b
Posts: 1653 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 18 666 3
Pro
Um. . .COlonels? In one of these two threads you will find a post from me, under Arssaguinus, explicitly stating "THis is A_in_ the _b. . so. .
1/18/2010 7:21 AM
a_in_the_b
Posts: 1653 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 18 666 3
Pro
I think about page three of "I got Screwed by WIS, so you can drop it already and stop trying to distract from the argument.
1/18/2010 7:26 AM
◂ Prev 1234 Next ▸
Sim Engine Like Real Life Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.