going for the brass ring

[aslan]

View attachment 8090

 

[sagefr0g]

Where is the real froggie!

Originally Posted by Machinist
My head hurts!!!
Ok....if your happy I am also. Your a funny green frog for sure.

Machinist

aweright, little more here......errhhh Macho you can put me on ignore if yah want.:devil::whip:

k, so from this stuff:

note: here z is the number of competitors
A = hero's skill level
if A = z then hero ties the field (still our hero realizes value above his cost)
if A < z then the field beats our hero, (still our hero realizes value above his cost)
if A > z then our hero beats the field

we can say A is some whole number factor of any one individual competitors skill level where each competitors skill level is equal to one another. (not always the case in the real world, but is the case the vast majority of the time & in the minor cases where it's not, an increased skill level of a competitor effectively reduces our cost anyway) so it's a safe approximation.
so now we can just set the competing fields advantage equal to the number of competitors Z .
to where:
[A/(A+Z)]*100% = %frequency hero gets the brass ring
then you can stick some real potential numbers in there for A ranging from one through twelve and Z ranging from one through eleven. to where you can hash out all the possibilities.
point being this merry go round situation is a fluid thing, yah never know how many riders it's gonna be, sorta thing, changes all the time and you could pour on your skill level by twelve different degrees but you always keep it so as A>Z
so you get those numbers (%frequencies of hero getting the brass ring) and if you average them, that's how often you can expect to get the brass ring, long run.
so then you can do stuff like multiplying the (%frequency hero gets the brass ring) times the (expected value our hero has when he rides alone) to get the long run expected value for our hero.

ok whatever, so but here's the thing, lol, this gobblygoop might even be right.
cause ok, i'm coming up with a theoretical expectation of (%frequency hero gets the brass ring) = 69.03%
and i'm coming up with a statistical (%frequency hero gets the brass ring) = 69.05% from my record of plays.:grin:

macho if yah don't like this stuff, well sorry man, but when you assigned me the real world task in the first place yah told me i should try and figure some of this stuff out myself.

 

[Machinist]

Aint it cool how them numbers seem to work out ?
I remember the first time doing a promo using VP, 10 guys, 1$ triple play. First time ever firing at something so big, but the numbers look out of this world. So with a hope and a prayer that everything i had read about vp and fluxuations, etc. , it would all turn out good.
Well the numbers we got after a month of VP came out exactly as predicted in the "books".
Whew!!!!
I think we all have different ways of solving, comprehending the math. Glad you have a good grasp finally. I know you like math to the decimal point, and you know i could give a crap about a tenth of a percent. What ever floats our boats.
And we can't forget the guy that can really lay the numbers out there so they are really understandable...Might have to buy him a pizza sometime
Machinist

 

[sagefr0g]

Aint it cool how them numbers seem to work out ?
....

yup.

I know you like math to the decimal point, and you know i could give a crap about a tenth of a percent. What ever floats our boats.

errrh yah, bankroll is everything, or damm near, lol, whatever

And we can't forget the guy that can really lay the numbers out there so they are really understandable...Might have to buy him a pizza sometime
Machinist

ooohh yah, thanks for reminding my cheap A$$, lol.

 

[aslan]

aweright, little more here......errhhh Macho you can put me on ignore if yah want.:devil::whip:

k, so from this stuff:

we can say A is some whole number factor of any one individual competitors skill level where each competitors skill level is equal to one another. (not always the case in the real world, but is the case the vast majority of the time & in the minor cases where it's not, an increased skill level of a competitor effectively reduces our cost anyway) so it's a safe approximation.
so now we can just set the competing fields advantage equal to the number of competitors Z .
to where:
[A/(A+Z)]*100% = %frequency hero gets the brass ring
then you can stick some real potential numbers in there for A ranging from one through twelve and Z ranging from one through eleven. to where you can hash out all the possibilities.
point being this merry go round situation is a fluid thing, yah never know how many riders it's gonna be, sorta thing, changes all the time and you could pour on your skill level by twelve different degrees but you always keep it so as A>Z
so you get those numbers (%frequencies of hero getting the brass ring) and if you average them, that's how often you can expect to get the brass ring, long run.
so then you can do stuff like multiplying the (%frequency hero gets the brass ring) times the (expected value our hero has when he rides alone) to get the long run expected value for our hero.

ok whatever, so but here's the thing, lol, this gobblygoop might even be right.
cause ok, i'm coming up with a theoretical expectation of (%frequency hero gets the brass ring) = 69.03%
and i'm coming up with a statistical (%frequency hero gets the brass ring) = 69.05% from my record of plays.:grin:

macho if yah don't like this stuff, well sorry man, but when you assigned me the real world task in the first place yah told me i should try and figure some of this stuff out myself.

In a short sentence, what are you saying?

 

[sagefr0g]

In a short sentence, what are you saying?

basically with competition as it fluctuates, yer gonna get that ring about 69.04% of the time.
gee, that was easy.:laugh:

 

[aslan]

basically with competition as it fluctuates, yer gonna get that ring about 69.04% of the time.
gee, that was easy.:laugh:

Thanks, that's what I thought you were saying. My next question is, "Why are you going to get the ring 69% of the time?" What are "you" doing differently that gives you that pronounced edge? Maybe I missed some earlier discussion, and apologize for that.

 

[sagefr0g]

Thanks, that's what I thought you were saying. My next question is, "Why are you going to get the ring 69% of the time?"

if you take each of the ways you can exercise an advantage of from one to twelve levels against a range of competitors, i.e going up against one competitor through eleven competitors each of those instances will give you a percentage of success in getting the ring. when you average all of the percentages of those instances the result is 69.03% . that would be the expected frequency for which you'd get the ring, long run as your number of competitors ebbs and flows.
edit: an example of one instance would be say our hero has 11 competitors, ok to have an advantage he has to have a skill level of 12, while each of the competitors has a skill level of 1.
hero's percentage of success = hero's skill level/ (hero's skill level + sum of the levels of competitors skill) so in this case hero's percentage of success = [12/(12+11)]*100% = 52.17%
there are as i figured it, 67 meaningful instances to compute such percentage frequencies..

What are "you" doing differently that gives you that pronounced edge? Maybe I missed some earlier discussion, and apologize for that.

no you didn't miss it, cause i didn't describe that, just stated that suppose the competitors all had equal skill, but our hero had skill that could be raised by a factor of one through twelve over and above the skill of each of the individual competitors. ie. say each competitor has an individual skill level of one, well our hero he can have a skill level of one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven and twelve. sorta thing. the competitors can't or don't.

 

[aslan]

if you take each of the ways you can exercise an advantage of from one to twelve levels against a range of competitors, i.e going up against one competitor through eleven competitors each of those instances will give you a percentage of success in getting the ring. when you average all of the percentages of those instances the result is 69.03% . that would be the expected frequency for which you'd get the ring, long run as your number of competitors ebbs and flows.


no you didn't miss it, cause i didn't describe that, just stated that suppose the competitors all had equal skill, but our hero had skill that could be raised by a factor of one through twelve over and above the skill of each of the individual competitors. ie. say each competitor has an individual skill level of one, well our hero he can have a skill level of one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven and twelve. sorta thing. the competitors can't or don't.

So either 12 skill levels or 12 allies against each of 11 competitors will yield a 69 success percentage?

 

[sagefr0g]

So either 12 skill levels or 12 allies against each of 11 competitors will yield a 69 success percentage?

lol, let me go to bed :laugh:
naw, errhh ok, i dunno about the 12 allies, interesting thought though,
but 12 skill levels for our hero against a skill level of one for each competitor, be it one competitor, two competitors, three competitors, .... up to eleven competitors. long as each competitor jus has a skill level of one.
like images below...
meh, missed part of the excell sheet, but i think you'll get the idea.....

 

[aslan]

Hero 2012! :toast:

 

[sagefr0g]

Hero 2012! :toast:

ok tryin again with these images, regarding yer one question:
..... and it didn't come out so good, oh well......

 

[aslan]

I get the idea, I think... View attachment 8135 So my strategy is to achieve skill level 13, 14 & maybe 15. That ought to get the job done! :grin:

Seriously, I kinda get the message, but how do you apply it to the real world? I may have missed the boat, but I'm a fast swimmer.

View attachment 8136

 

[sagefr0g]

I get the idea, I think... View attachment 8135 So my strategy is to achieve skill level 13, 14 & maybe 15. That ought to get the job done! :grin:

Seriously, I kinda get the message, but how do you apply it to the real world? I may have missed the boat, but I'm a fast swimmer.

View attachment 8136

meh, well can't give away to much here, little hint in this link maybe:
http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showpost.php?p=256305&postcount=98

as an aside.....
anyway, competition can be a bitch, no doubt about that.....
maybe doesn't hurt to think about dealing with that........
wonder how this example would relate to game theory....
now if i could just understand game theory...... lol

 

[Machinist]

Aslan apply what Sage is saying to the discussion we had on chat about a month ago, i think there was 4 or 5 of us in the room at the time. We discussed a type of game with skskskskskskkives if you remember..
Remember that night when i decided to let out a bit of info on some new machines to the select few that happened to be in the room? I mean i have never ever put anything of value on this site, well at least not in black and white type...... Now that would be foolishness
Add that to the brass ring theory of Sages.......

Machinist

 

[sagefr0g]

Aslan apply what Sage is saying to the discussion we had on chat about a month ago, i think there was 4 or 5 of us in the room at the time. We discussed a type of game with $&%^#% if you remember..
Remember that night when i decided to let out a bit of info on some new machines to the select few that happened to be in the room? I mean i have never ever put anything of value on this site, well at least not in black and white type...... Now that would be foolishness
Add that to the brass ring theory of Sages.......

Machinist

wtf? scratch that damm word outa there boss. geesh. you know what word i'm talkin bout, scratch it.
too much value there, wtf you wanna ruin yer image...... no really man scratch it, aslan'll figure out what yer talkin bout.:cry::whip:

 

[tthree]

wtf? scratch that damm word outa there boss. geesh. you know what word i'm talkin bout, scratch it.
too much value there, wtf you wanna ruin yer image...... no really man scratch it, aslan'll figure out what yer talkin bout.:cry::whip:

Relax frog. I think everyone already knew what you are talking about. It was not as subtle as you think. So speed of play is your advantage? That is what I get out of it.

 

[sagefr0g]

Relax frog. I think everyone already knew what you are talking about. It was not as subtle as you think. So speed of play is your advantage? That is what I get out of it.

:cry::cry::cry::cry::grin: really, lol.... whatever. edit: it's dead anyway, dead, dead, dead, i tell yah.
errhh yeah, that's one contingent of it, that an how much ummphhh you put into it relatively speaking.

 

[sagefr0g]

Aint it cool how them numbers seem to work out ?
.....
Machinist

yeah it is, and yah learn something after you misinterpret the numbers, look again and see where yah misunderstood something, lol. not you, me, lol.

like i was thinking that 69.03% success rate was about the best you could do long run, NOT! lol
got fooled by when the stipulations of our hero's advantage i initially imposed gave a percentage success rate that agreed with my statistical data success rate.
but in reality, that percentage success rate can be improved upon by increasing the advantage (within the limits that it can be increased)
found that out by foolin around in excell doing what if's and changing the original advantage setting i had stipulated for a variable advantage strategy (that i'd erroneously assumed was optimal) to a couple of different static advantage strategies, as pictured below:
of course a higher advantage is gonna mean more success, lol, i shoulda known that. also surprised by how my original way the hero never loses against the field, and these other examples the hero does occasionally lose against the field but the percentage success rates are higher.
plots below are # times hero beats the field against percentage success rate
i'm figuring the way we been doing it, we have about a 8.55 to 1 advantage on average against the field, that gives a 69.62% success rate as opposed to what my records show, a 69.05% success rate , sorta thing, fwiw....

 

[tthree]

yeah it is, and yah learn something after you misinterpret the numbers, look again and see where yah misunderstood something, lol. not you, me, lol.

like i was thinking that 69.03% success rate was about the best you could do long run, NOT! lol
got fooled by when the stipulations of our hero's advantage i initially imposed gave a percentage success rate that agreed with my statistical data success rate.
but in reality, that percentage success rate can be improved upon by increasing the advantage (within the limits that it can be increased)
found that out by foolin around in excell doing what if's and changing the original advantage setting i had stipulated for a variable advantage strategy (that i'd erroneously assumed was optimal) to a couple of different static advantage strategies, as pictured below:
of course a higher advantage is gonna mean more success, lol, i shoulda known that. also surprised by how my original way the hero never loses against the field, and these other examples the hero does occasionally lose against the field but the percentage success rates are higher.
plots below are # times hero beats the field against percentage success rate
i'm figuring the way we been doing it, we have about a 8.55 to 1 advantage on average against the field, that gives a 69.62% success rate as opposed to what my records show, a 69.05% success rate , sorta thing, fwiw....

Frog, my old eyes can't read that. I even got out my magnifying glasses for fly tying and other fine work. Couldn't read any of it.:laugh:

Maybe I should use this emoticon. I gave up the patch for my blind eye a while back but this is what I used to look like:eyepatch:.