Tony/Skyler trivia question

mikepage said:
Your attempt to assign motivation here makes the same mistake that shows up in many responses (both here and on Facebook) to the original question.

In the Tony/Sky case, the fact that we’re asking the question is itself evidence. If the data were typical or aligned with baseline expectations, there would be no question. Answering as if it were asked at random ignores that conditioning. (Some of you—like sixpack and skogstokig—are getting this.)

The same applies to FargoRate’s choices. The fact that we don’t split 7-ft and 9-ft ratings is itself evidence. If our goal were, as you suggest, short-term engagement or revenue, splitting them would be the obvious, economically superior move. We would get far more engagement by giving people what they think they want. The fact that we don’t do that is important evidence of something.

In both cases, the error is the same: ignoring the selection mechanism that produced the question and the policy, and treating highly informative behavior as if it carried no information at all.
Click to expand...
Wow you are pompous and condescending.

You already provide the ability to split 7' and 9' in your own app. Although, admittedly, most reported games don't seem to have that distinction marked.
 
mikepage said:
Your attempt to assign motivation here makes the same mistake that shows up in many responses (both here and on Facebook) to the original question.

In the Tony/Sky case, the fact that we’re asking the question is itself evidence. If the data were typical or aligned with baseline expectations, there would be no question. Answering as if it were asked at random ignores that conditioning. (Some of you—like sixpack and skogstokig—are getting this.)

The same applies to FargoRate’s choices. The fact that we don’t split 7-ft and 9-ft ratings is itself evidence. If our goal were, as you suggest, short-term engagement or revenue, splitting them would be the obvious, economically superior move. We would get far more engagement by giving people what they think they want. The fact that we don’t do that is important evidence of something.

In both cases, the error is the same: ignoring the selection mechanism that produced the question and the policy, and treating highly informative behavior as if it carried no information at all.
Click to expand...
Cool story bro.
 
mikepage said:
Put this on facebook; let's see where the right answer shows up first.

****
Pure trivia question from the FargoRate database

There are 10 recorded matches between Tony Chohan and Skyler Woodward (7 one-pocket, 3 rotation).

Question: How many of these did Tony win?

Bonus: If Tony had any wins, how many were one-pocket vs rotation?

Curious to see the guesses.
Click to expand...
Here are the results:

Tony won all 10 matches: 7 one-pocket and 3 rotation
 
mikepage said:
Your attempt to assign motivation here makes the same mistake that shows up in many responses (both here and on Facebook) to the original question.

In the Tony/Sky case, the fact that we’re asking the question is itself evidence. If the data were typical or aligned with baseline expectations, there would be no question. Answering as if it were asked at random ignores that conditioning. (Some of you—like sixpack and skogstokig—are getting this.)

The same applies to FargoRate’s choices. The fact that we don’t split 7-ft and 9-ft ratings is itself evidence. If our goal were, as you suggest, short-term engagement or revenue, splitting them would be the obvious, economically superior move. We would get far more engagement by giving people what they think they want. The fact that we don’t do that is important evidence of something.

In both cases, the error is the same: ignoring the selection mechanism that produced the question and the policy, and treating highly informative behavior as if it carried no information at all.
Click to expand...
mikepage said:
View attachment 881945
Click to expand...
Jennifer Lawrence Oops GIF - Find & Share on GIPHY.gif


I have a newbie question Mike: How to obtain a FR if you never had one and there are no fargo reported tournaments near me, and the ones that within reasonable distance require 200+ robustness?
 
july9x said:
I have a newbie question Mike: How to obtain a FR if you never had one and there are no fargo reported tournaments near me, and the ones that within reasonable distance require 200+ robustness?
Click to expand...
Join a league to keep your fargorate low and robustness high. It's the worst kept secret right now. That's what everyone and their mother is doing in my state. That way you can enter tournaments that are Fargo-capped and proceed to "rob" the field. It's the modern way of sandbagging.
 
Kris_b1104 said:
Join a league to keep your fargorate low and robustness high. It's the worst kept secret right now. That's what everyone and their mother is doing in my state. That way you can enter tournaments that are Fargo-capped and proceed to "rob" the field. It's the modern way of sandbagging.
Click to expand...
Same thing happening here too!
 
Ģüśţāṿ said:
When known local high level players continue to lose fargo enabled tournaments to low players, you tend to hear it often. This is what happens when you want to play in 6XX and under big money events.

I'm just a random stranger on the internet, so please don't take my word for it 🫠
Click to expand...
Understandable 👍 The tournament directors need to ban those players...if they have the balls. A lot of times they're friends with the TDs though
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top