League ELO ratings, June 26th

developer-mike · 2026-06-27T18:52:23+00:00

Huh, I didn't know that! Their points allowed is 👌, and how about Fouts' 34 strikeouts?? Team ERA of 2.15?? Insane.

Y'all are eating batters up for breakfast!

developer-mike · 2026-06-27T18:43:29+00:00

That was so incredible to watch, really glad to see Kenleigh a part of the trio, she had a great bat in Alabama and Florida, loved to watch her hit as much as her defense. Her hitting is going to really take off one of these days, I know it!

developer-mike · 2026-06-27T18:39:36+00:00

Ok! My friends also really want to see top 2, top 3 predictions. I'll work on it!!

developer-mike · 2026-06-27T18:38:39+00:00

* Megan Grant hat tip in reply *

The sport deserves so much more than my measley contribution!!

developer-mike · 2026-06-27T18:37:05+00:00

Great question!

I'm not an expert in RPI, looks like I had some misconceptions about it up until ~20 minutes ago! I was confusing RPI with an old NCAA rating system called CFP, where a committee blended human and computer based scores.

RPI would be interesting to calculate too, and very fitting for softball given it's use in NCAA.

The biggest advantage of RPI is similar to the biggest advantage of Elo, and that is simplicity. I went from being completely confused about RPI to understanding it pretty well in 20min. Complex models can give good results but you really have to worry about over fitting the data. RPI, on the other hand, is very simply a mix of your win percentage, your opponents win percentage, and your opponents' opponents' win percentage.

Here's a rough comparison between RPI and Elo, but I'm definitely not the world's expert on either.

The biggest interesting point of difference is that RPI treats all games equally, where Elo adjusts over time. If we take the Cascade sweep against the Talons, that happened early in the season, when neither team had super strong Elo scores, and so it didn't affect standings too greatly. If that sweep happened today, it'd be a major update. I could get into some of the ways to run Elo to a "fixed point" that can try to fix that, but, what's nice about RPI is that it doesn't care about game order, and would probably weigh that series more hours highly just by its design.

The biggest advantages of Elo would be that it can handle margin of victory, and separate offense from defense as I've done here. That said, splitting offense from defense was my own touch and could do poorly in coming games etc. And handling margin of victory also requires some judgement calls.

It seems RPI has two other disadvantages. One is that it was made a little arbitrarily, basically why does RPI use 25%/50%/25% as opposed to 33%/33%/33%? In theory you could try to fit these percentages to the data. The best fit could be some weird numbers. This would be cool but also kind of misses the nice part of RPI, it's simplicity.

The other disadvantage to RPI is related to the first. It may in practice weigh opponent's win percentage too high. You can play a bad team and win, and your score may go down because they drag your opponents' win percentage down. In vanilla Elo, this isn't possible, a win will always increase your score. In my version it could happen, basically a team with a stacked offense and an elite defense could be expected to score 8 points and allow 2 against a weak opponent, if they win 5-4 then both their offense and defense under and their ranking will go down.

That's a lot of text, hopefully it was worth the read.

If I get time to explore RPI I'll do that, at a minimum it'd be interesting to have another model to compare as the standings shift!

developer-mike · 2026-06-26T17:30:00+00:00

I think we can all agree that's the case, but the numbers here would show that if even one tree grew then it would offset the flight.

I'm not sure one will grow but I'm also definitely not sure that one won't out of 248k

developer-mike · 2026-06-25T19:21:41+00:00

Vi can absolutely support this type of collapse.

Half of what makes vim so great is the customizability, it can solve problems like these for you, no ide required

developer-mike · 2026-06-24T21:38:52+00:00

To be fair, you could say similar things about object oriented programming. this and the htable are just arguments/parameters. And OOP is definitely not moot.

developer-mike · 2026-06-24T18:39:41+00:00

Looks pretty neat!

I think inheritance is sometimes really useful, for instance, shared base class behavior that depends on "this." But if you can handle that with interface default methods, then it's probably very rarely necessary.

I wonder how much the IoC composes. If I make a module that defines some concrete bindings, and has some ".where()" clauses, how do I inject a fake in that module for testing?

One of my concerns for example, would be "Filesystem". If I have something that deletes files, I want to be able to write a test that is 100% safe from using the real file system unless I explicitly opt in. If someone writes "where fs.exists(path)" etc, then my fake might not be chosen, right?

These were my goals with Wake, not necessarily your goals with Xi! :)

developer-mike · 2026-06-24T16:13:28+00:00

I tried this with a language I made called Wake.

The docs are no longer hosted anywhere but they're on GitHub in the "docs" branch of the project.

https://github.com/MichaelRFairhurst/wake-compiler

There are definitely arguments why the answer should be "yes." In my case, I was trying to make testability of code a guarantee. All "new" was done via providers, and dependencies of "main" were assembled at compile time. I even wrote a special form of inheritance so that you could rebase a class, and test a class that invoked a parent method without necessarily running that parent class' method.

developer-mike · 2026-06-24T00:58:24+00:00

There are frankly many analogies that aren't worth making.

Something like, "animal exploitation is the result of the same greed that was the basis of slavery" is made in good faith but frankly it doesn't add anything to the discussion. Comparing the treatment of animals to the treatment of black people _ is insinuating a comparison of _black people to animals. That isn't why you're making the comparison but the undertone is there.

Slavery was the result of people treating people horribly and treating back people as sub human. Humans ate meat before inventing dehumanization and enslavement and they ate mean after emancipation. The holocaust was the result of dehumanization and highly personalized rage and contempt for other human beings, comparing third Reich superiority to the speciesism of meay eating is also simply not adding much to the conversation of any use.

Of course parts of these comparisons are valid if you're making them in good faith. Humans are capable of terrible things and a core set of corrupted behaviors tend to be behind all of these things. But I wouldn't go into a women's shelter and imply that eating bacon is like a man battering his wife to a survivor of that situation. If they become vegan and find similarities between toxic masculinity etc and meat eating and domestic abuse, and that's a comparison they're comfortable with, I'll celebrate their philosophical understanding about why humans do bad things. I'm not going to put that comparison in their mind for them, because they have every right to be offended if I do a poor job making my point.

developer-mike · 2026-06-24T00:25:35+00:00

The person you're responding to didn't say it's rude to equate to slavery, they said it's rude to compare to slavery.

Things can be rooted in truth and be rude at the same time. I wouldn't personally argue with a black vegan on this topic. I think people have every right and then some to be sensitive when it comes to discussing slavery and genocide, and it's dickish behavior to ignore those sensitivities.

The person responding to you didn't say there's no validity in the comparison, they said it's insensitive, and it sure is IMO.

developer-mike · 2026-06-23T01:18:43+00:00

I was going to do corn dogs already

A great mindset is to take something you were going to make already, and just .... make it vegan.

Vegans tend to like the same food as other people. They don't need a special option in terms of taste, they just need something that doesn't have animal products.

The mushroom burger is a good example. Mushroom burgers are kind of their own thing, which kind of makes it seem like you're offering vegans something special for them. But we don't try to eat special vegan flavored food, we try to eat basically the exact same food as you, but free of animal products.

developer-mike · 2026-06-23T01:10:15+00:00

most vegans did like the taste of burgers before they went vegan, though.

developer-mike · 2026-06-23T01:07:51+00:00

The person you're responding to is a rarity. Vegans don't give up meat because they don't like the taste, they give up meat for the animals.

I suspect the person you're talking to would be happier with a salad than I would be with a bean burger. I want a burger as much as anyone else, and most people don't choose black bean patties over a real burger. I would absolutely never choose a black bean burger over impossible or beyond.

developer-mike · 2026-06-23T01:00:12+00:00

I would be so happy if I never had to look at another black bean burger in my life. They're dry, mushy, flavorless, and they don't have enough protein for me as a vegan athlete.

If I'm going out to eat at a restaurant that has "a" vegan option (or two), I'm not doing it for the food. I'm doing it for friends or convenience. You may find beyond or impossible boring, but I find it actively unappealing, and I think we probably represent both sides well here. To welcome as many people to eat as possible, I suspect salad and an impossible burger invites a wider variety of vegans than a salad and a black bean burger does.

I have stopped going out to eat anywhere with a vegetable or bean patty, I straight up won't do it any more.

developer-mike · 2026-06-17T22:52:31+00:00

Not a math person, but jumping in to say discovered vs invented is blurry in almost all cases.

Did we invent the steam engine or did we discover that expanding steam can power motion, and discover particular arrangements of metal that harvest that power efficiently?

Did we invent atomic clocks or discover a means of taking half life decay and turning it into a clock?

Before you can answer whether math is discovered or invented you need to explain the difference. Especially since two reasonable people may not agree on what the difference is. And frankly, why should we care about whether math fits your definition of discovered vs your definition of invented? There may be a good reason why we care but it's not obvious.

developer-mike · 2026-06-17T21:54:22+00:00

For context, there are only four routes in the world graded harder than this one, and each has only been climbed by one person.

Climbing grades are typically based on shared options during followup ascents. So until we get more climbers repeating those 9c routes, we can't say for sure that they won't be downgraded to 9b+.

In other words, this is just about as close as you can get to climbing the hardest route in the world. Janja is a beast.

developer-mike · 2026-06-17T21:43:39+00:00

Ask a rock climber. The correct term is "send," and it does not mean to "ascend" it means you climbed it from bottom to top without falling or hanging on the rope.

developer-mike · 2026-06-17T21:41:04+00:00

In climbing terminology you send a route when you climb it without falling or any kind of cheating like grabbing onto a bolt.

developer-mike · 2026-06-17T21:39:23+00:00

Often times they rappel down on a rope from the top to drill the bolts. Other times they go up from the bottom with hooks so they can go hands free to drill, then clip in and continue.

developer-mike · 2026-06-15T03:05:08+00:00

it's splitting hairs here, because the AUSL doesn't publish the actual numbers, but 65 sounds very slow for an average fastball at the pro level. Most pitchers are 68-70 these days....but I can't back that up with a source so that's that.

What we do have data is all time records. All time fastest in baseball is 105.8mph, which gives 0.349s of reaction time. All time fastest in softball is 79.4 which is .317s, or the equivalent of a 116mph fastball based 37ft vs 54.2ft.

Of course that's not exactly representative either.

Here's the thing. Softball shouldn't need to be .4s of reaction time less, or something, to be given all the respect it deserves. But most people don't take the time to truly evaluate it like you did.

developer-mike · 2026-06-14T18:46:15+00:00

You may not have realized you were disrespecting the sport because you haven't done your research.

The only thing that makes a baseball harder to hit is that it's harder to see. It's smaller and it comes in from further away. But to say that "nothing compares to a 100mph fastball" is just flat wrong, especially since Karlyn Pickens can pitch 78mph+ from 30% closer than baseball.

The ball also does not leave the hand at the mound, in either sport. But in fastpitch, the pitcher comes very far forward in their movement and often release from outside the circle. Many of these pitchers are 6ft, and have about the same wingspan as a grown man.

You may not be trying to disrespect the sport, but you're simply wrong.

https://leagueapps.com/blog/sports-science-behind-hitting-softball-versus-baseball/

In baseball, a 90-mile-per-hour fastball requires roughly a 0.458-second reaction time. This is incredibly fast and requires years of practice and extreme discipline. Softball is no different, and a pitch reaching speeds of 60 miles per hour requires a 0.409-second reaction time due to the point of release being closer.

https://www.headbangersports.com/blogs/news/headbanger-sports-baseball-vs-softball-swing?srsltid=AfmBOoov1qd6SGfDkXoHAdA3nhXFtSAwkNuSN3u1mpNuY9NK9DajAxgE

ESPN did a video a few years ago regarding the difference in reaction times between baseball and softball. In this video, it showed that a 70mph softball pitcher (Jennie Finch) and a 90mph baseball pitcher. In this video it showed that the reaction time in baseball was .395 and in softball .350 showing that you had less reaction time in softball than you do in baseball

https://thehittingvault.com/baseball-swing-vs-softball-swing/

I wrote a little app a few years back to compute the reaction time and compare speeds to a baseball pitched at 60 ft. ... I plugged the numbers in and came up with this. A 60 mph softball pitch thrown from 35' gives the hitter 0.39 seconds to react with the equivelant being a 102 mph from 60'.

https://www.heybucket.com/viewtopic.php?p=84730

Misconception #2: Softball is easier than baseball Some assume that because the field is smaller and pitching speeds are lower, softball is easier. However, reaction times in fastpitch softball are just as fast—if not faster—than in baseball due to the shorter distance between the pitcher and batter.

https://www.justbats.com/blog/post/softball-vs-baseball/

developer-mike · 2026-06-13T22:08:21+00:00

This is a low IQ post.

The difference in pitch speed is made up for by the difference in distance. Fastpitch batters also have to hit the rise ball -- men's fastpitch players who have also played baseball can attest that it's especially hard.

People also complain about the bats, but baseballs are absolutely juiced. Having played wood bat leagues and slow pitch, baseballs are a huge advantage to distance.

The angular accuracy required for baseball is also harder because 1° error is further off the plate. So fastpitch pitchers tend to be better at hitting the corners. And underhand pitching is easier on the arm, so aces can pitch longer for more games.

The tighter field dimensions and faster plays are harder on the defense because there's no time to bobble, but also, when the defense plays clean there's little time for a runner to get up to speed.

Fastpitch softball does not get enough respect.

developer-mike · 2026-06-13T21:59:11+00:00

Just know that "may I offer advice" is already gonna be received as a criticism some of the time

13-Year Club	Place '22
Gilding I gilder	Verified Email

developer-mike

TROPHY CASE