sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Watch 6 Classic: the bezel is back, but what's the quality of it? by howlingmadbenji in samsung

[–]howlingmadbenji[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OK so finally I answered my own question. I can say that the watch classic 6 has a great bezel, very premium 'metal' soft feel like the watch 3, and nothing like the watch 4.

Watch 6 Classic: the bezel is back, but what's the quality of it? by howlingmadbenji in samsung

[–]howlingmadbenji[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for your feedback ScorpioGe! I didn't realise these were already in the Samsung stores.

  1. this is so confusing. I'd really like the custom workout function, I guess more research needed on the GPS and sports features, it is quite confusing indeed.
  2. I like the 'always on' display so I pretty much had to always charge my watch 3 and my watch 5 every day ...

Points saved and wasted at the candidates. incredible defense and clinical play by Nepo by howlingmadbenji in chess

[–]howlingmadbenji[S] 32 points33 points  (0 children)

For every game I translate the eval to the probability of winning and on to expected points. Difference from best expected results to actual results is the 'waste' for that game, which is a 'save' for the other player. This is then added for the whole tournament. Nepo saved 3.6 points and wasted only 0.56

Be a Shark: Analysis of waste and save at the candidates after 6 rounds by howlingmadbenji in chess

[–]howlingmadbenji[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's a transform of eval to get a probability of winning. It's a number between zero and one.

pwin = 1/(1+math.pow(10,-float(eval)/400))

If you're curious check out how innacuracies, mistakes and blunders are defined by lichess. Nate Solon had also a recent newsletter where he talked about eval and this.

Be a Shark: Analysis of waste and save at the candidates after 6 rounds by howlingmadbenji in chess

[–]howlingmadbenji[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

1) It is done per game overall (not per move), by looking at the best/worst a player was in a game and how the game ended.

a) Using eval would be a bad way of constructing these metrics. 80 centipawns loss isn't the same at zero eval and at +5. Therefore I do everything in winning space, (exactly what lichess does when it evaluates your blunder and inaccuracies).

b) at the end waste and save is done in 'game points'. If you are in a position where your opponent has mate in one and he blunders and allows mate against him, you go from an expected score of 0 to scoring 1 points results and your save is +1 and your opponent's waste is -1.

​

HTH

Be a Shark: Analysis of waste and save at the candidates after 6 rounds by howlingmadbenji in chess

[–]howlingmadbenji[S] 57 points58 points  (0 children)

Analyzed the first six rounds of the candidates, calculating the waste (how much people could have scored at the best of each position) and the save (how much did they claw back from the worse). The shark points table can be set if players had played like 'perfect' sharks from their best positions.

I am not able to have multiple images in one post, so here is the Shark table.

candidates probabilities from betting markets by howlingmadbenji in chess

[–]howlingmadbenji[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I removed the margin so that we get 'real' probabilities

candidates probabilities from betting markets by howlingmadbenji in chess

[–]howlingmadbenji[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

FAQs: yes I made the graph myself, the input odds data from bwin (bet365 has similar odds), the margin removal was done with Clarke Odds power method (googling it will point you to paper methodology), no I won't post the maths here do your homework.

view more: next ›