Subject: Never won winnables!
User: firenze
Message:
TT/e, if you want to see how good you are against other players, try some tournaments, particularly the Masters and the Freakout. You even have permission to use a deck of cards. It won't count against your Elo.
User: Kumquat-of-Conciliation
Message:
Unfortunately, he *doesn't* want to find that out. Which is why he does what he does, and is why he's several times come up with his own "competitions" that will always show him at #1, or at worst #2. It's about his ego -- not whatsoever about how he compares *in real life*.
User: rbw--3
Message:
"It takes ten times longer than on the software."
So if it takes 20-30 minutes or more per game using cards(10x normal per your statement) all you have to do is look at the time history instead of accusing anyone who doesn't agree with you of also using cards. This is the second time that argument has been used. The people saying this are really trying to play gatekeeper over the conversation.
Cards during any competition is wrong. The other claims of taking away a first win or corrupting ELO don't hold water.
User: BuzzClik
Message:
Tony saves the games after he copies down the layout. He fires up the game again when he has it solved, and enters the solution according to his notes. The time recorded by freecell.net is far shorter than the total elapsed time. Tony has stated this himself.
So, looking at history will tell you nothing.
"accusing anyone who doesn't agree with you of also using cards." My argument stated that among those who are the most vehement in trying to shut down the conversation, some may be using cards. That's a long way off from "accusing anyone who doesn't agree with you of also using cards."
rbw--3, I think we should revert to our previous unspoken agreement of not responding to each other. I can feel your ire building, and I'm simply not interested in having you attack me personally again. So, you get the last word. For good.
User: rbw--3
Message:
Time history does show inconsistencies if someone is using cards. The time stamp from one game to the next versus the game time should reasonably add up. If every game or every hard game has a large gap it would be suspect (excessively long times that do add might be a flag too) I know people take breaks, but you could easily have checked the people you are trying to accuse:
| 10/4 | 10:30 | 9x2 8456-6 | Winnable | 3:25 | |||||
| 10/4 | 10:25 | 9x2 17970-6 | Winnable | 2:18 | |||||
| 10/4 | 10:23 | 9x2 24109-6 | Winnable | 3:44 |
My recollection is there were 3 people who made opposing comments last time this was mentioned. Your comment above already accused us of "cheating".
lastly, how in the world do two people on a forum come to an unspoken agreement? Start being honest and I'll be happy to ignore you.
User: TNmountainman
Message:
rbw--3: "The other claims of taking away a first win or corrupting ELO don't hold water."
Are you serious? How can you not see that TT/E is doing exactly that. Back on Sept. 30th, in this thread, "Ellie" posted about winning a 6x5 game to make it 1/52. How is that NOT taking the possibility of a fantastic (organic) first ascent from someone else?
The ELO boost was 3.379. How is that NOT a corruption of ELO?!?
And not that Buzz needs my help............but, as he states, you completely mischaracterized his words to paint them as if he was accusing all who don't agree with him of using cards.
Yes, times should "add up". Once upon a time, when I was first trying to embarrass TT about things, I posted such time data, but he didn't care, and it was part of his 'admittance'. One single example doesn't a case make, but long-standing patterns are obvious - altho even then not completely conclusive. But this is a more modest point in the grand scheme of cheating.
User: rbw--3
Message:
TN. Do you not have a replay button? I do. You could also use notes on replay like Tony which would seem fair. At that point it is even easier than using a deck. There are plenty of people who replay until they win and many are posted on this thread.
Buzz was either trying to accuse people of cheating or head off any pushback by saying that defending Tony made those people suspect of using cards themselves. In either case it's rude. Regardless, you should let Sancho Panza speak for himself.
If someone in their 80's wants to make posts of their wins deck or not, I'm not going to chase them around the forum harassing them.
User: TNmountainman
Message:
I don't disagree with anything in your first paragraph. Using notes or whatever during a replay is a *totally* different animal than trying to beat a game on first attempt (because it has no effect on any database). I'll not get into the tiff between you and Buzz any further than my simple statement above.
However.................I will point out that you didn't address either of my points directed at your "don't hold water" comment.
User: outskirts
Message:
They've both tried to provoke me by implying I cheat. Just a few posts ago. Lol
Sancho Panza lol but really he's more of a Tattoo.
And he's always promising to let someone have the last word. If only!
User: rbw--3
Message:
I did address the first win in my replay comment.
I missed the ELO comment originally. Tony's ELO is obviously inflated. The game sees him as a 2350 player. Not 100% sure but I think the game loses the same points he gained. From the games view it adjusted appropriately for a loss to a 2350 player. From that standpoint you could say the game now has the correct ELO since it lost to someone with a 2350 ELO as it should have.
Alternately with what Tony's real ELO should be the game ELO would be maybe 4 points too low. This will have almost no effect on anyone who plays the same game later. besides 8x4 ELO can be wildly off from actual game difficulty. It's not the designers fault. There's just too large a database with too few plays along with years of tournament stats mixed in before ELO came out.
User: TNmountainman
Message:
You missed the ELO comment originally?!!?? To repeat myself (and you):
"The other claims of taking away a first win or corrupting ELO don't hold water."
User: Uncle_Vito
Message:
I am available for either side in this "discussion". Skilled in several forms of persuasion.
User: TNmountainman
Message:
@rbw--3......... I didn't have time earlier to fully address your comment about "The other claims of taking away a first win or corrupting ELO don't hold water." I addressed the second part, the one about the cheating corrupting ELO. The first part you say you "addressed", but (imo) nothing there in your comment about replay addresses my point. I have no idea how you're trying to link a replay to a first ascent. They're virtually the opposite.
Let me make an example. In the same above example "Ellie" 'won' a game to make it 1/52. What if today you, or I or Uncle Vito, or whoever, encounters that game, and by chance (but without cheating) also happens to win it. It would now show 2/53, which is not (obviously) a first ascent. That 'privilege' has been stolen away. Not to mention more elo points, but that's not the worst part. It's not common, shall we say, for most of us mortals to win a game to make it 1/53 (which is what *could* have happened without the cheating).
I suspect you missed my point about that. But in any case, I don't think you've truly addressed *either* of my points. They both very clearly *do* hold water.
And Uncle V.......................gee, I don't know what to tell you. I think Buzz is on the right track, tho. We have a wind turbine expert on staff, but not sure he does windmills.
User: rbw--3
Message:
Both replay and cards take away the first time won without it being the first try for the player getting that first win. Tournaments also do the same on a much larger scale with the best players trying the same game repeatedly. If Tony didn't use cards and used replay instead the game would not be listed with 0 wins.
You gave no data for ELO, but the next player in the example would probably get about 1/20th point less for their win. He also loses games at 2350 and those games would get an offsetting extra boost. To say that somehow this impacts other players ELO in any meaningful way is just plain wrong.
The last game I played is the one below. A level 7 9x2 with a 20% win rate before I played which somehow has a 1453 ELO.
The distortion from that one game to my ELO is more than anything Tony could do to my ELO in a lifetime.
| 10/5 | 5:33 | 9x2 7487-7 | Winnable | 6:54 | Won | 23.1% | 1453 |
All your claims are good if you're trying to rally the farmers with pitchforks and torches, but are relatively meaningless for practical purposes.
User: outskirts
Message:
To say that somehow this impacts other players ELO in any meaningful way is just plain wrong. rbw3
A fraction of a point is what all the whining posturing and social castration is all about! Some of us get that! Thank you!
And thanks also for your logic regarding the replay button.
User: Airborne
Message:
i would not necessarily call that rating an aberration. That is pretty close to that levels average. The statistics show total amount, not just streak mode games which are the only ones that effect elo. So a 5-26 game might have a 5-5 record that counts towards that games rating.
User: rbw--3
Message:
I've mentioned before that the average player in 9x2 level 7 has an ELO in the 2000 range so even a 50% game at level 7 should be much higher. I don't know how the data before ELO was parsed and if they knew if most of these were streak mode or not. This isn't an isolated example either. There is no way over half of the average players would win that game. At 1450 that would imply something like 60% of 1500 players would win.
User: TNmountainman
Message:
@ rbw--3........... Well, that's a bit better trying to 'match up' replaying a game and cheating on one. But..........it doesn't change the fact that when he uses cards (successfully), it 'cheats' the first (legitimate) winner from having that experience. It's impossible to say otherwise. And again, the elo point(s) are a trivial by-product. And yes, as joey has repeatedly pointed out, tournaments do the same thing - but at least those are (presumably) 'actual' tries, even if unpenalized. Tournaments have (unfortunately) been codified here for a long time, and it's VERY unlikely their effects on the database will ever be mitigated. My point stands, as regards the cheating, even if a tournament game is won (on first 'real' attempt) to make a game 1/52. It takes away the possibility of that "Eureka!" moment for somebody else.
The "impact on elo" I'll leave alone, as that is indeed a relatively trivial part of what I'm saying. But..............I still maintain what he's doing does affect his elo (and thus the game elos). Duh. Otherwise wouldn't do it, and his elo would be maybe 1500 as noted. (Altho personally I'd give him more credit than that.)
User: outskirts
Message:
TN will be dying and thinking 🤔 hmm I don't think I harassed Titanic Tony enough.
User: rbw--3
Message:
Which fake persona said Tony's ELO should be 1500? I'm losing track. Is it one of your fake personas or someone else's?
User: outskirts
Message:
I've seen fake personas from TN, firenze, and buzz in this last exchange alone!
User: BuzzClik
Message:
TN — A remarkable trend in today’s social atmosphere is the lack of value placed on integrity. Not that everyone lacks integrity, but it is not given the same weight as it once was. This little kerfuffle is a microcosm of the bigger problem. Your points about the impact of the using cards are rock solid, and arguing whether or not the impacts are large enough to worry about is a pragmatic approach but misses the underlying principle.
I know you understand this, and others do, too.
btw: it makes me smile when folks start yammering about multiple nicks on this thread. It ties back into the integrity issue, but the lack of self awareness is sparkly and hilarious. As if Tony and Ellie2 were not the same person.
User: rbw--3
Message:
This has to be parody. Help me out, is this supposed to be serious?
User: outskirts
Message:
Sorry buzz. It's what one does with those aliases that might make a stranger on the net be able to determine if someone has integrity or not. And if we use cards or not in a public solitaire site, that has absolutely nothing to do with whether we possess any integrity or not. No one's buying what you're trying to sell.
User: BuzzClik
Message:
I chose the word “integrity” rather than “honesty” because of the added facets of integrity. And, keep in mind that I was talking about valuing integrity, not possessing it.
User: TitanicTony
Message:
I didn't think this game was all THAT difficult. AND, I really did get it on my 1st try (meaning that I didn't have to redeal the cards):
| Game: | 6x4 8259-5, |
| Game stats: | 52/1/1.9%/2257, |
| Player Elo: | 2336.209 â–˛ 3.175. |
User: Ellie2
Message:
This one will help me catch TitanicTony
| Game: | 5x5 21679-5 |
| Game stats: | 9/1/11.1%/2157 |
| Player Elo: | 2311.050 â–˛ 2.380 |
User: TitanicTony
Message:
Fun game:
| Game: | 7x3 20776-6 |
| Game stats: | 9/1/11.1%/1938 |
| Player Elo: | 2339.474 â–˛ 0.726. |
User: Ellie2
Message:
| Game: | 5x5 24703-5; |
| Game stats: | 9/1/11.1%/2156; |
| Player Elo: | 2302.450 ▲ 2.452,,  .. |
User: Ellie2
Message:
This was a very difficult game, imo:
Game: W8x3 10090-10
Game stats: 38/1/2.6%/2189
Player Elo: 2314.518 â–˛ 2.669.
User: Ellie2
Message:
What a happy surprise.
Game: 5x5 8075-5
Game stats: 7/1/14.3%/2124
Player Elo: 2320.748 â–˛ 1.981.
User: smelly_cootiefied_fence_post
Message:
Downright odiferous: 7x4 11624-7 | |
| Game stats: |
User: Ellie2
Message:
Game: 5x6 26206-5
Game stats: 3/1/33.3%/1868
Player Elo: 2316.792 â–˛ 0.565.
User: GoAdoptADog!
Message:
I’ve hit several of these today on 10x1s, esp on customized 10x1 difficulty 8. Several to post but under my game stats if anyone wants the elo. Pays well. Usually around 2. But sometimes 4.
I was raising my elo well and got up 14 points then took a nosedive after losing a handful of level 10s. The level 8s brought it back up quickly
User: smelly_cootiefied_fence_post
Message:
| 5x6 4952-5 | |
| Game stats: | Quite stinky. |
User: GoAdoptADog!
Message:
| Game: | 10x1 9884-8 |
| Game stats: | 1/1/100%/1525 |
| Player Elo: | 1704.225 â–˛ 2.141 |
User: GoAdoptADog!
Message:
Brew,
I’m banking on my belief that prob only a moderate portion of the players on here actually read the posts. Most just play I think, so it shouldn’t affect the elo too much if those who read this start playing 10x1s at that level, ( at least I think?¿)
But yeah, I’ve messed up several times since I started this afternoon, and when you lose one and it knocks you down 5 or 6 points, you can make it up easily by just winning the next 2-4.
Perfect for me bc I’m still learning some variants and can fumble around a lot. And someone more experienced could rlly bring it in. Yayyy for elo! Happy playing!
User: TNmountainman
Message:
Go, Denny has a few times started a thread, or added to one, on his latest and greatest schemes to rocket his elo score up. Those can't be found using the search engine, tho, because "elo" is only 3 letters, and 4 are needed. But if you're curious enough, you could seek those out by scanning lots of thread titles for "elo", especially ones started by Denny/MrFixit. I named this practice "elo hunting", because................well, that's what it is. Certainly at the beginning of elo, there was much opportunity for making huge gains by selectively seeking out the big payoffs - which some folks did, just because they could. As time has gone by, those opportunities for quick big harvests have dwindled a lot due to just increased play, which over time will bring elo scoring closer into 'parity' - as well as diligent work by ElGuapo behind the scenes, putting his finger(s) on the scale as needed.
All of which is not to dissuade you from your quest - only noting that it's yet another example of nothing new under the freecell sun (which of course is not *technically* true, but just seems to fit the occasion). But your 10x1 may be someone else's (like Denny's) 6x7, for example, if you see my point.
User: HopDiriDiriDattiriDittiriDom
Message:
GoA,
To get an idea of your Elo gains, visit this page, select "Players" tab and type your (or any other player's) name, you should see what you have gained playing which variant. Indeed 6x7 works for you.
User: GoAdoptADog!
Message:
Yeah I totally get that TN, I wasn’t nearly as fast at the 6x7s as Denny so I only played half a day bc I’d rlly bombed my elo trying some of the harder variants and didn’t want to botch it completely (in case it ever feels important to have a good one when I get more experienced, idk)
I’m still not a super elo freak and it def won’t keep me from trying tougher variants, but I do want to be a little bit more cautious with it, like not just pressing quit when I’m bored and not being too lazy about a solve. That’ll keep it challenging and fun for me.
I mentioned the 10x1s only bc after playing many today, I think I’ve only been awarded under a full point once. And to get at least a full point, usually 2 or more for each win, on games which aren’t super difficult, is a good way to get elo up to par so as not to damage it too much later when experimenting with others.
I get impatient with elo building so I’m not going to sit there playing games for hours only to have it go up by like 3 points. (Oddly tho, I can cruise a streak all day if I’m in the mood for it) that’s why I mentioned these, bc it was a find for me and maybe it’ll be a find for someone else too, idk.
Idk El Guapos role for the site, is he an admin w technical stuff? Will he make the elo less now for that variant or something?Augh I hope not. I lose plenty on this but it doesn’t devastate my elo at all, and it’s much easier to win on lvl 8 than lvl 10. Also, more ppl seem to play the higher levels when playing custom variants, so level 10 didn’t pay out as much elo steadily compared to level 8, at least I think.also every time I lose level 10 my elo plummets hard and it’s not easy to keep it climbing steadily and quickly. On level 8s tho I like being able to lose, even 3 or 4 x in a row without cringing bc it’s so easy to keep it steady. I’m sure there are other levels of variants like that w elo, it’s just the best I’ve found so far for me
User: TNmountainman
Message:
And here's one of MrFixit's "pump and dumps" (lol):
User: TNmountainman
Message:
ElGuapo isn't an administrator, but was *the* main guy behind the elo math when this all started (a HUGE undertaking). He had considerable help (altho I am not privy to all the details), but he's now fine-tuning "awards" and "demerits" as need be. He can 'splain more if he sees fit.
And btw..........since "par" is technically 1500 (altho that's really more the default starting point), and you're now 1700+...............you're not a "par" player. ;) One more thing to keep in mind is that the changes of your score involve giving or taking points to/from "the game", and the degree to which that happens is based on the difficulty rating of the individual games, VS. your own elo. The effect of that, is that as you move higher and higher, the difference between points, on average, will mean that you're not gaining at the same rate. A win at 1700 over game 12345 will reward you more than winning against the very same game when you are at 1800, etc........ And you've probably figured this out by now, but mostly.......the game ratings are gradually and incrementally changed (by ElGuapo), and arrived at, by groups, meaning by climate/level. So game 12345 of variant X might be terrifically easy, and game 12346 might be terrifically hard, but the theory is that over the long haul, those nuances will even out.
User: GoAdoptADog!
Message:
Hop, thanks! I didn’t know about that page..definitely helpful, but it can be misleading in scope when playing on custom levels maybe. Like I’m definitely best at 8x4 and 9x5s. These I speed through. But in trying to get my elo up I set 8x4 to lvl 12 thinking it’d help. But I can’t speed through those, obviously, ha. The 9x5s won’t let me customize lvl for some reason so it remains positive. But idk why the 6x7s are good? I don’t remember thinking I did well w those. Either way, re: 10x1, it’s prob negative bc I was playing lvl 10 difficulty of those last night and much of today.
Each time I’d get ahead on elo, it only took a handful of losses to knock me down to worse than I was. So I set it back to level 8 today after my elo went from nearly 1690 to I think around 1650 after some bad losses. After I set it to level 8, I got to 1700 again playing intermittedly this afternoon, no problem.
I made rising stars page earlier playing level 8s, but then at midnight I had a few losses so it would seem like it’s not my game, but it was down 3 points as opposed to nearly 50 I thankfully recovered. It just gives rlly big points each time, usually close to 3 points, which is why it’s rlly helping me bounce back after some dumb mistakes. I’m tired so Ive lost several times esp in past few hours, but it’s much easier to recover when the next game will give you half of whatever you lost. A few gave me over 4 points, in case you want to check stats and grab some easy elo :)
hey btw, I searched for the new music link you sent and can’t remember what thread it’s in. Where was that?
User: HopDiriDiriDattiriDittiriDom
Message:
"hey btw, I searched for the new music link you sent and can’t remember what thread it’s in. Where was that? "
My last post about a music link was in "calico" thread.
User: GoAdoptADog!
Message:
Ps- thank you both, Hop and TN. Y’all (and redberet) and a few others have helped me out much in my play with your info. I mean I only just realized the other day how to see how many others have won or lost a game I just played. (Which of course inspired me to go on a freecell bender) I got 7 points on some game the other day and I felt like a queen, lol. I’m glad to know I’m not the only freecell addict
&hop, thnx. I’ll give it a listen
User: TNmountainman
Message:
Speaking just for myself personally...............you are a welcome addition to this site. It's neat to see new, enthusiastic players discover the riches of this wonderful little community.