5x6-1 was interesting in today's HotStreak. Many game you can win in a short period of time - like 40-some seconds for me and likely 30-some or 20-some seconds for players like jimmyp or CK. But, then it's also possible to get some challenging deals that require several minutes to get home safely.
Maybe the 5x6-1 shows that there should be a limit of the number of tries at hotstreak per day. Dr. Bombay had 18 with 1 try, finishing second. #1 for the day took 19 tries and maybe avoided the tricky games that way. A limit of 10 tries would be nice in my opinion.
It's pretty much a small group who plays Hot Streak and we know if JimmyP or Calico or Uberman etc. want to invest
the time they'll put up the number. When I see the variant I'll have a number I think I can reach and I'll play until I get it;
although there are complete failures like today's 9x2 where I thought I could put up between 8 to 10 but didn't come close. Also , rbw I use your number as a goal figuring I should be a couple behind you.
Just a quick lil update on the Hot Streak All-Time medal table, courtesy of (who else?) Hop:-
| Records | Medals | Details |
And there is also "Solo" version that counts only the first attempts.
I'll admit I was sceptical at first about taking multiple attempts on Hot Streak, but because everyone is playing different games it kinda makes sense that people should have more chances to put up a decent number. One player might get ten 90% games in a row, whereas another might have a couple of 5%ers in there, like rbw posted earlier. But I'm open to all forms of lists, so it's still interesting to see the alternative record also.
I didn’t like it either at first but I’ve come around to it. Where I think it’s really nice is when you crap out in the first few minutes. I may have once proposed that you still have only one 30 minute window but you can start over after a loss (but with less time remaining).
"I may have once proposed that you still have only one 30 minute window but you can start over after a loss"
Maybe a minute or so penalty for each additional try would work. You're one of a very very few who could lose 5-10 minutes and still place at or near the top.
Days like today for example, a couple of players with one try were bumped down by others who frequently make several attempts.
Seems there should be some kind of balance for a more level playing field. I think the majority take into account how many tries the leaders have before trying to pass them.
We had talked about a pretty good way to balance this. The thought was to allow unlimited replays just as we do now, and to show the raw streak numbers in a column labeled Streak, same as now. But then we add a column, Score, which is the streak multiplied by a reduction factor based on number of tries. Ranking in the list is based on Score, not Streak.
The reduction factor is simply a 10% deduction for each additional try. If you only have 1 try the factor is 1.000 (no deduction), for 2 tries it's 0.900, for 3 it's 0.810, for 4 it's 0.729, then 0.656, 0.590, 0.531, and so on. Doing it iteratively like this has two advantages over the simple 0.9, 0.8, 0.7 ... approach. One, your score never reduces to zero. And second, it makes decision making easier for the player. The question, "Should I try again?" always comes down to whether you think you can do at least 10% better than you just did.
Make sense? So if a player gets a streak of 25 but had 3 tries, his score is 25 x 0.810 = 20.25. We completely preserve the incentive to keep trying if you're not happy with your last streak, but we reward the player who does it without replays.
I mean, I like the idea personally, but I'm not sure if the majority would embrace it as it might be seen as being a little over-complicated. As there are no official stats on this sites for wins, though, I guess it wouldn't hurt to put both numbers up there, as you suggested.
I like it too. Without some kind of diminishing returns on replays the rankings just feel a little artificial. Like the top ranked HotStreak is often not the most impressive, and that's weird. As for being over-complicated, I think we'd present it much more simply on the scores page. The explanation would be something like: "HotStreak scores are a player's final streak tally less a 10% reduction for each successive attempt. (So don't start over unless you think you can outdo your previous streak by 10% or more.)"
FWIW, I think 1 try is what it should be for official records. After all, Hot Streak has "streak" in the title which I think should mean lose once and you are done. You could still do a separate set for standings and records for multiple attempts.
ElGuapo, interesting that using your method cattlefeeder still wins yesterday as 0.9 ^ 8 = 0.430467 * 32 = 13.77 still eclipsing Uberman and you. But, I'd guess that one of you or Uberman might have gotten to 32 with eight attempts. You just have to play at tournament speed and then bail if a hard game comes up.
I think of Hot Streak as similar to ski racing. You want to go fast, but not so fast that you miss a gate.
" interesting that using your method cattlefeeder still wins yesterday as 0.9 ^ 8 = 0.430467 * 32 = 13.77 "
looks like you used the total # of plays (32 in 8 tries) instead of the streak which was 13.
i can't think of any sport where you are penalized for improving your position.
Freecell is sport? Cool, can I count this as my exercise for the day?
But yeah, I can see both sides of the 'argument'. It's just that with the games being different for every participant, you can't accurately judge one performance from another anyway.
User: cellmate
Message:
i can't think of any sport where you are penalized for improving your position.
I'm not following you here. Is there an example in sports you had in mind? In every case I can think of sports don't allow retries at all. Tennis allows a fault. You can take a mulligan in a friendly game of golf. Three strikes before you're out in baseball? Those are all finite opportunities so they're self-limiting. No one imagines competition would be improved by allowing teams to rekick a missed field goal or reshoot a missed free throw without consequence, right?
tennis... you lose a game... you can still win a set. lose a set you can still win the match
golf... 9 holes... 18 holes... lots of room to move ahead if you mess up a hole
long jump... best of 3 tries. same with triple jump.
missing a field goal doesn't end your game
etc...
The sports analogies really don't work very well. In sports the odds of winning a point / game / match decrease with misses or losses. Missing a first serve in tennis lowers the odds of winning the point. Losing a game reduces the odds of winning the set. Losing a set reduces the odds on winning the match. Baseball each strike lowers the odds of reaching base. HotStreak there is no effect on an individuals odds of winning for each loss. Playing fast, and maybe even recklessly fast actually helps when you can try 20 times against someone who used one try.
Did I never do a HotStreak instructions page describing how it works? Jeesh...
I think since streaks tend to be short in HotStreak mode (10-15 typically) that's not enough to assume everyone has gotten a similar difficulty random set of deals. So I think retries are entirely acceptable given you might have gotten a trickier set of deals than others. And I don't think we need punishment-- trying again and risking what you've got is enough.
Ok I did a real quick "how it works" page. Hope I got things right. I did Hot Streaks several years ago now.
Link on the right side of the main Scores page right below the Elo Ratings thing.
Todays a good day for multiple tries. I'm guessing Miranda's 20 for 8x3x7 may win the day. That's an elite class number.
Yep, that's a really good score, only 3 off the calico record.
Well done Jack, left it late there but just squeaked home!
Is there an award for bad deals in hot streak? Do I win the bad deal award today?
| 16.70% |
| 43.10% |
| 43.50% |
| 34% |
| 46.20% |
| 86.40% |
| 24% |
| 15.40% |
| 5.70% |
Another example of why there's issues with unlimited replays. (Searching for an easy first game)
| 9/10 | 3:18 | 12x1 9254-9 | HotStreak | 0:03 | Lost | 97% | 609 | 32 | 33 |
| 9/10 | 3:18 | 12x1 6264-9 | HotStreak | 0:02 | Lost | 94.7% | 655 | 18 | 19 |
| 9/10 | 3:18 | 12x1 8243-9 | HotStreak | 0:03 | Lost | 52% | 1422 | 13 | 25 |
| 9/10 | 3:17 | 12x1 20457-9 | HotStreak | 0:02 | Lost | 97.6% | 568 | 40 | 41 |
| 9/10 | 3:17 | 12x1 26291-9 | HotStreak | 0:02 | Lost | 97.2% | 577 | 35 | 36 |
| 9/10 | 3:17 | 12x1 21373-9 | HotStreak | 0:02 | Lost | 96.4% | 621 | 27 | 28 |
I see what you're getting at, and I know who you're referring to, but most of those games *were* easy, so I'm not sure that was what they were trying to do(?) At the end of the day, even if they were trying to find an easy first game, it's no guarantee that their next game will be, so it seems a pretty pointless exercise anyway.
I'll admit I don't understand their reasoning behind sometimes trying to clock up 932 tries, but it does look a little BACKSPACE-ish ie. trying to skew the game stats on purpose, for no reason whatsoever other than to alter the fabric of time, perhaps.
That's not what the elo values show.
Which ones are you saying are unbeatable?
When playing streaks,of any sort,there is,occasionally,a freeze.
.......Which causes you to quit hundreds (or thousands) of games within seconds??
This might be a great time to make a conciliatory statement concerning why you do what you do - losing so many games quickly.