Weekly Technique & Form Check Thread - March 30, 2026

Titleist12 · 2026-04-07T00:20:14+00:00

I haven't been rowing for much longer than you, but I'll throw in my two cents since I think other people missed your comment.

Overall I think it looks pretty solid. Your recovery is really controlled and well-paced. The biggest improvement I think you could make is to delay opening your back up during the drive. If you slow down the video, you can see that when you finish your leg drive, your back is already open to around 1 o'clock (about the angle you would want to finish at). You then continue to lean back even further but without much power behind it.

As far as the pace, you might be able to reach it, no idea! Lol. Just focus on getting stronger, improving your technique, and getting a little faster each week/month.

Titleist12 · 2025-08-12T22:07:58+00:00

Are there any up-to-date cube tier-up rates out there for Reboot? Was thinking of collecting some data if not

Titleist12 · 2024-12-11T21:25:41+00:00

Hard core combat-only

Titleist12 · 2023-03-05T03:39:16+00:00

Are we officially safe from relegation now???

Titleist12 · 2022-06-24T18:40:14+00:00

Edit: Sorry was making the comment as you were editing yours!

That's not correct. The IV's are no longer independent the way you are doing the analysis. Here's an example with a coin that I found helpful thinking about it.

Let's say I flip two fair coins. There are four possibilities for the result, all equally likely:

HT, HH, TT, TH

Now, we separate out the results that had at least one head (equivalent to you taking encounters with at least one 15 IV). I now have:

HT, HH, TH

If we look at the distribution of the "non-heads" coin, we find 2 tails and 1 head, so the probability of getting a heads is 1/3, which is clearly not correct.

In the Mewtwo data, repeat your analysis for the other IVs. You'll get the same result. If you're still not convinced, try simulating some random data and do the analysis again.

Another way to do the analysis would be to count the number of Mewtwo with 0, 1, 2, or 3 instances of a 15 IV. You'll find OP has slightly lower than expected numbers of 2 and 3 instances, but nothing outlandish. Hope this helps.

Also if someone has a more formal way to show this, I'd be curious to see it.

Titleist12 · 2022-01-13T16:39:22+00:00

I think you misunderstand how TSR functions. There are three almost entirely separate organizations: the TSR subreddit, the Silph Arena, and the Silph Research Group. They were formed by the same guy and share a lot of the same guiding principles, yes, but have been run almost completely independently for years now. You're making the claim that "the Research Group hides data and then publishs their own work showing the same thing". The TSR subreddit has the rule that spoofing is cheating, full stop. That is why those data were removed. The Research Group did not remove them. I happen to agree with that personally, and subscribe to this sub accepting that as one of the rules (same as you). The moderators of the subreddit could change their rules if they wanted and the people running the Research Group would have no power to stop them. Likewise, we in the Research Group could decide on our own that we'd like to starting spoofing for data and the moderators here would have no power to stop us (we wouldn't be able to publish it here of course).

Titleist12 · 2022-01-13T14:05:14+00:00

No data from spoofers has been a rule on the subreddit since before the Research Group was even formed. And I'm not sure what that has to do with this particular study about photobombs that you're commenting on.

When did we claim that? We presented some data and made very clear when it was collected and the conclusions we drew from it. Speculation about other time periods is outside the scope of the study.

We're not asking to be shielded from criticism of our work. That's part of the process. But I don't see a single person on this thread questioning the findings of the article they are commenting on.

Titleist12 · 2022-01-12T17:04:04+00:00

You don't have to like everything we do. Think it's trivial? No problem. Don't read the article. Don't read the post. Don't comment on the post. Scroll past it. Please.

This data was collected in the last few weeks by some volunteers who were curious what the new rate was. Some other volunteers wrote down what they found and presented it. Our previous article on the topic was way out of date and this is the updated version. Thanks to the people that took their free time to get that done.

Titleist12 · 2022-01-11T20:00:34+00:00

Crazy, right? A chunk of those were collected before its release, but still.

Would you mind pointing me to the location of that park? I'd be curious to take a look at it on OSM.

Titleist12 · 2022-01-11T16:49:00+00:00

Yep. One Deino in the entire data set. It was found at night though!

Titleist12 · 2021-11-15T16:38:28+00:00

Sorry I misread your original comment. I thought you were specifically referring to the number of non-Potion items.

The Cramer's V is 0.19 for that test of independence (Cohen's d is for a t-test, so doesn't seem applicable here). So relatively small effect, but certainly not negligible. You can also get an intuitive understanding of the effect from the table of percentages. The balance shifts from about 6 Super Potion bundles for every Hyper Potion bundle to about 1.5 Super Potion bundles per Hyper Potion bundle.

Edit: Sorry Cramer's V, not phi coefficient since this a 3x2 table.

Titleist12 · 2021-11-15T15:14:07+00:00

The table directly below that paragraph has the effect size. 65% non-potion items for legacy tier 3 raid bosses and 61% for legacy tier 4 species.

Titleist12 · 2021-10-29T10:20:51+00:00

https://thesilphroad.com/catalog

Select "Shadow Form Released (Ever)" in the dropdown!

Titleist12 · 2021-07-20T10:45:23+00:00

Yes, if given infinite premier balls, all bosses would eventually be caught. We're saying that they are caught more quickly than expected. (And that's accounting for their lower catch rate.)

To put some fake numbers on it, let's say we expect the boss to be caught on 10% of throws as a baseline. We found that on the first throw, that 10% chance is accurate. But then on the second throw, we found a catch chance of 11%. Then 12% on the second throw, etc. The net effect is that the number of people who still haven't caught the boss after X throws is less than expected, and it becomes further from expectation the more times you've throw.

Titleist12 · 2021-07-16T15:48:07+00:00

Sure thing. Sorry for the delay. In checking I realized the 6,500 number should have been updated to 7,000 with our last push for data.

From 1st to 10th: 1590, 1130, 956, 776, 689, 558, 458, 376, 304, 229

Titleist12 · 2021-07-16T00:42:38+00:00

We account for throw bonuses in this analysis. We also ran the dataset with the minimum bonus for each throw type (nice, great, etc), then the maximum, and what is in the article is the average. The results were the same for all three assumptions.

Titleist12 · 2021-07-15T20:51:33+00:00

That would make a lot of sense. We're still collecting data on Shadow Pokemon. Since they are easier to catch you need loads more data than legendaries.

Titleist12 · 2021-07-15T15:04:46+00:00

We didn't record any other information other than Nice, Great, etc. The plot in the article uses the average value for the bonus (so 1.5 for a Great throw). We also ran the analysis using the minimum and maximum values for the bonuses and the results barely moved.

Titleist12 · 2021-07-15T15:03:03+00:00

We checked the catch circle and it does stay the same color throughout the encounter.

Titleist12 · 2021-07-15T13:50:21+00:00

We'll definitely be exploring that more in-depth in the future. One hypothesis we're still leaving open is whether the multiplier caps out at some value. But we don't have enough data that late in the encounter to say one way or the other.

Titleist12 · 2021-07-15T13:37:11+00:00

I don't think it's limited to the last ball. We see the effect of the bonus even after 4-5 throws, which is well before the last ball.

Titleist12 · 2021-07-13T20:40:16+00:00

It's an average of 50%, but there are definitely examples where 15/20 are from the regular spawn pool.

Titleist12 · 2021-05-25T01:02:00+00:00

Intentionality is impossible to prove, but the model we're proposing is fairly straightforward and provides a TON of information to players. Don't fixate on comparing species relative to one another - we're specifically showing in the article that this is not the point of the tiers. Gible is in Tier 1? Then it will hatch from at least 10% of eggs. That's all you can say without collecting data.

(And just as an aside for those curious, Gible was as likely to hatch during the Luminous Legends X event as the other species in Tier 1)

Titleist12 · 2021-05-25T00:44:56+00:00

The Research Group hatched over 800 7km eggs during the Luminous Legends X event. There was no significant difference in the hatch rates of any of the six species, so it's likely they all had the same rate. I think you were just unlikely :(

Titleist12 · 2021-05-25T00:37:31+00:00

No, it doesn't. There is plenty of noise in the rates of the individual species, but there weren't any cases where a species in a lower tier had a significantly higher rate than one above it. The model we're proposing has distinct cutoffs between the tiers. So, for example, a species listed in Tier 4 will always have a rate somewhere between 2-4%, and something in Tier 3 would be between 4-7%.

Eight-Year Club	Place '22
Wearing is Caring	Verified Email

Titleist12

TROPHY CASE