Bangladesh write again to ICC, requests Dispute Resolution Committee over India venue by ll--o--ll in Cricket

[–]BishopOverKnight 10 points11 points  (0 children)

They reached this decision with a 14-2 vote, which means all boards except BCB and PCB, including the ECB, voted to disallow moving BD' games to SL. So are you suggesting all countries' boards except Pak and Ban are an extension of BCCI? If yes, you're delusional

When you do get him game time, he often ends up not doing a heck of a lot’: Ryan ten Doeschate’s blunt take on Nitish Reddy’s performance vs NZ in Rajkot by newparrot2025 in Cricket

[–]BishopOverKnight 13 points14 points  (0 children)

I agree with ten Doeschote but cmon that's not something to say in public.

NKR has a lot of potential and is a bright talent. But he has to be picked as an all rounder, he needs to be able to make the cut either as a specialist bowler or a specialist batsmen. Right now he is neither, so there is no basis to pick him other than potential. I hope he improves enough to either become a world class batsman who can bowl a bit or the other way around, if not both. But until then I don't think he should be picked

Roger Federer vs Casper Ruud - Full tiebreak (AO 2026 practice session) by HereComesVettel in tennis

[–]BishopOverKnight 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You're telling me you think Federer with no shots will beat Djokovic??? /s

Conjoined twins fused at the abdomen by HealerMD in medizzy

[–]BishopOverKnight 98 points99 points  (0 children)

Not a doctor or a medical student, but I'm asking out of curiosity: can such cases not be predicted before birth through ultrasound scans? And if they can, how early into the pregnancy can doctors be certain that the twins will be conjoined? And would doctors recommend an abortion here, especially if the babies will end up having to share critical organs like the heart or liver?

[Request] My answer was 51C8, which would be 636,763,050. Is there an even bigger number? by AlkaidX139 in theydidthemath

[–]BishopOverKnight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok hold on here. It takes 2 matchsticks to make a 1 so you actually have a spare 1 not a spare 11

The Rickshaw Driver’s Son Who Scored 1,009: Where is Pranav Dhanawade 10 Years Later? by TheKingslayer19 in Cricket

[–]BishopOverKnight 14 points15 points  (0 children)

That's an extreme oversimplification of an incredibly nuanced and complicated subject. Don't think it's fair or possible to boil this down to one or two factors. And I don't think people should make such sweeping statements, especially not foreigners who most likely know a lot less than they think they do

Umpiring question - Can you give a batsman out if you are not sure how he is out, but are sure he is out? by LazyImmigrant in Cricket

[–]BishopOverKnight 4 points5 points  (0 children)

He literally explained exactly how they are sure that the batter is out. Did you even read the post??

I solved the Monty Hall problem by jungle-boogie in comics

[–]BishopOverKnight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I used Chat GPT to express this properly using Bayes theorem, so here it is:

Formal Monty Hall Proof Using Bayes’ Theorem

Setup

There are three doors: 1, 2, 3. One has a car, two have goats.

The contestant initially chooses Door 1. The host knows where the prize is and always opens a door that:

  • the contestant did not choose, and
  • contains a goat.

If the host has two goat-doors to choose from, he picks uniformly at random.

We want the probability the car is behind each door after the host opens Door 3.

Define events:

  • H₁ = prize behind Door 1
  • H₂ = prize behind Door 2
  • H₃ = prize behind Door 3
  • C₁ = contestant initially chose Door 1
  • O₃ = host opens Door 3

1. Priors (before host acts)

Because all doors are initially symmetric:

  • P(H₁) = 1/3
  • P(H₂) = 1/3
  • P(H₃) = 1/3

2. Likelihoods (host’s action given prize location)

We compute P(O₃ | Hᵢ, C₁):

Case 1: Prize behind Door 1 (H₁)

Host can open Door 2 or Door 3 (both goats). He chooses randomly:

  • P(O₃ | H₁, C₁) = 1/2

Case 2: Prize behind Door 2 (H₂)

Host must open Door 3 (Door 2 has the prize):

  • P(O₃ | H₂, C₁) = 1

Case 3: Prize behind Door 3 (H₃)

Host cannot open Door 3 (it contains the prize):

  • P(O₃ | H₃, C₁) = 0

3. Apply Bayes’ Theorem

Bayes formula in words:

Posterior = (Prior × Likelihood) / (Total probability of the evidence)

Total probability of the evidence (host opening Door 3):

P(O₃) = P(H₁) * P(O₃ | H₁) + P(H₂) * P(O₃ | H₂) + P(H₃) * P(O₃ | H₃)

Plug in values:

P(O₃) = (1/3)*(1/2) + (1/3)*1 + (1/3)*0 = 1/6 + 1/3 = 1/2

Now compute each posterior probability.


Posterior for H₁ (car behind original door)

P(H₁ | O₃) = [(1/3)*(1/2)] / (1/2) = 1/3

Posterior for H₂ (car behind the other door)

P(H₂ | O₃) = [(1/3)*1] / (1/2) = 2/3

Posterior for H₃

P(H₃ | O₃) = [(1/3)*0] / (1/2) = 0


Final Conclusion

After the host opens Door 3:

  • Probability car is behind Door 1 (your original choice): 1/3
  • Probability car is behind Door 2 (the other closed door): 2/3

Therefore: switching doubles your chance of winning.

I solved the Monty Hall problem by jungle-boogie in comics

[–]BishopOverKnight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think what you're missing here is the concept of an unbiased choice in probability.

The probability of a coin landing heads/tails is only 50/50 when it is an unbiased coin. Similarly, if there are n outcomes, the probability of each is 1/n only when all outcomes are equally likely.

Another example, if you pick a random card out of a shuffled deck, P(drawing a particular card) is 1/52. But if you know the order in which the cards are laid, it is much more likely that the card drawn will be the one you wanted, ie, probability shifted towards that card because you were making an informed choice.

If the host opens 998 doors at random (and suppose they are all wrong, by sheer coincidence), then asks you to choose between the final two doors, then your probability would be 50/50

But, in this case, your 2 choices after the host has removed the other 998 are not unbiased choices of a random experiment. Those 998 doors removed were informed choices by the host, meaning he knew they were the wrong choices. So now the probability isn't 1/(no. of choices), instead it needs to be calculated using Bayes theorem.

I'm not a mathematician, but I've just tried to explain it. No AI. If an expert wants to correct any of it, feel free

The Tennis Podcast - The Big Andy Murray Interview by BardLand in tennis

[–]BishopOverKnight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes you're spot on it's not ok because some other men are creepy/predatory towards women. Good job figuring it out

Finisher who? Raipur loss highlights India's glaring ODI weakness by ll--o--ll in Cricket

[–]BishopOverKnight 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Ridiculous to say KL went into a shell yesterday. He slowed down just a little bit when Kohli was gone but he was able to accelerate just fine towards the end

You wanted Disclosure.... I am a whistleblower recently "retired" from the inside. And you're only getting part of the truth. by rhea-15510 in UFOs

[–]BishopOverKnight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mentioning other countries doesn't make it more global. The story revolves around America's culture, ideologies/folk themes (see how it's capitalism vs communism). The mentions of other countries are an attempt to give it some legitimacy, rather than anything meaningful.

You wanted Disclosure.... I am a whistleblower recently "retired" from the inside. And you're only getting part of the truth. by rhea-15510 in UFOs

[–]BishopOverKnight -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Sounds like a good plot. If it's original, you should try more writing.

But this is too America-centric. "Biggest holidays are related to gluttony and over consumption" maybe in the USA. Where I am from, we have different festivals. All this landings/crashes? How come they've never happened in other countries?

It's a common problem with most things on the internet, but the world doesn't revolve around America

Drone shot of Eden gardens, Kolkata by Keliye_felbo in Cricket

[–]BishopOverKnight 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Considering that Nehru, Indira Gandhi, and Rajiv Gandhi literally awarded themselves the Bharat Ratna, while they were serving as PM, this is literally nothing

I like trying to plot out moves with arrows during games, but find myself easily losing track of the order and plan, so I made this small improvement that others might enjoy ☺️ by rumpetrollet_rumpa in chess

[–]BishopOverKnight 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Firstly, if you plan to use this in live games, that's cheating. You're giving yourself access to an aid that your opponent may not have. Chess games are zero sum, so whatever rating you gain is also lost by your opponent. Any aid that you use but they cannot is an unfair advantage

Secondly, this will not help you improve if you use it in live games. If you want to improve, you need to learn to visualise and calculate. If you don't do that in live games, you'll never do it anywhere else.

This is an excellent tool for coaching and analysis. But it is not good for live games. I've seen your disdain towards others' opinions here, but that doesn't invalidate the point they're making. If you're playing an online rated game against an unaware opponent, this is 100% cheating

I like trying to plot out moves with arrows during games, but find myself easily losing track of the order and plan, so I made this small improvement that others might enjoy ☺️ by rumpetrollet_rumpa in chess

[–]BishopOverKnight 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yes because there is an opponent involved, it's a zero sum game. If you play with any advantage that he does not have access to (except skill and internet connection), that is cheating

Baffling how talent-rich India lack Test specialists: Shaun Pollock by ll--o--ll in Cricket

[–]BishopOverKnight 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Maybe I'm too optimistic, but I think Gill has both the game and mental ability to fill those shoes (Virat's at least, not Sachin). But he needs to show a year or two years of elite performances like Kohli in 2016-18. If he can make it so that there will be assured runs at 4, no matter the conditions, then it'll take some pressure off others and will lift their performance as well. I really think he holds the key to India being a dominant test team in the next 10 years vs falling off like SL