|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:30 pm
Edit: Poignant analysis that does not deserve bottom page'd. The Haelstrom Fist Some results, I expected. Some results however.. looking at it from a "I am no longer participating therefore I'm at least fairly unbiased here" standard, just seem bizarre.
I especially disliked the rampant amount of tie judges, as I've not really seen any fights this round that warrant a flat tie; it is very difficult personally, to ever see two individuals fighting reach a perfect equality in score, much less so many times in a single round. I even saw one fight where two judges reached a "tied" verdict, while one did not, and that just seems silly because it basically let the single judge decide who won or not with a wide variety of criteria varying judge to judge.
Also, examples like this [I'll take one from Yasuo v James]..
Yasuo: Grammar (4)/ Conciseness (4)/ Roleplaying (4.5)/ Strategy (4)/ Dominance (5) = 21.5 (versus Fier's 3)
Yasuo: Grammar (5)/ Conciseness (3)/ Roleplaying (3)/ Strategy (2)/ Dominance (2) = 15 (versus Fier's 3)
... Look at that. One judge stated by numbers, that Fier inched out Yasuo in fight control by a clean margin, while another judge stated that Yasuo blew James the ******** away in dominance.
How can you have such radically differing opinions on what should be a fairly static observation? If it's a close fight, granted, but what's with the massive boost in that 5v3 judging?
My problem there, is that such hyperbole wins and loses fights for people, and has the first round too - much as I hate beating a dead horse, KB's fight being a perfect example.
Let's again take that FiervYasuo fight and grade it purely by dominance to demonstrate my point:
Judge 1: 2 Y, 3 F.
Judge 2: 2.5 Y, 3 F.
Judge 3: 5 Y, 3 F.
Yasuo has 9.5 Dominance, F has 9 dominance. 2 judges feel Fierach had fight dominance, one judge feels Yasuo had fight dominance.
Yasuo wins.
Now this is varied of course by the fact we have several other stats, but it still progresses the same way, and ultimately, the above regularly occurs with the current system. Now back to my regularly scheduled useless post: My opponent hasn't posted yet! Help! Flaaaaaayerrrrrrr!! scream
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:40 pm
Ok, now I'm a little irked.
Out of three judges, two of which gave me ties, only one gave comments.
And it was one of the ones that gave me a tie.
...
...
Wait, I'm slightly wrong. Another judge gave me a "I hope she comes back next year".
Hahahano.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Female of the Species
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:40 pm
Actually, I agree. There have been a lot more ties than normal, but this is probably because after counting up the individual grades, it came out as such. I'll at least speak on my behalf: ties are usually a surprise for me. Cause when you're grading each individual area, you're not thinking about totals. You shouldn't, anyway.
As for the dominance issue, I can't really comment on that because even that's an issue between subjective and objective judging. Dominance is more objective, but it's also have subjective influence because someone may be falsely gaining dominance due to either foul play or not doing something by the books.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:42 pm
*Reads his comments.*
The only section I care about is the Roleplaying section.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:42 pm
I have no idea what the ******** Hael is getting at.
If he's suggesting That Yasuo should win because he got more points, that's dumb. We've been over that; judge majority rules.
If he's just wondering about where the judges have wildly varying point differences, I have no idea. Some people just grade differently, it's subjective and not something you can entirely control.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:42 pm
what vin said about the dominance. different people appreciate different things, and catch different things, and understand different things. i note my grading reiko higher than anyone else when he was fighting katie in hoh in the roleplaying category, because his h2h did not confuse me.. i was exposed to it, and his writing was sensible to me.
subjective, seriously.
i offer no explanation on the other subject.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:44 pm
Sokoya Ramak Ok, now I'm a little irked. Out of three judges, two of which gave me ties, only one gave comments. I got two sets of comments and an insult to my opponent. Way to go Rhos. Judge Three Herp derp, SOMETHING STANCE. Not descriptive at all. At all. It annoyed me, so you lose points. Aside from that, I have very little to say regarding this fight, aside from "Hey Maken, apostrophes are your friend."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:45 pm
Each judge is assigned three fights to send all comments containing to those fights to their respective fighters. I already sent mine out, so if you haven't gotten comments yet, they'll be coming soon from the other judges.
For now, I'm taking a break then setting up Round Three.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:46 pm
The Darth Vizzle I have no idea what the ******** Hael is getting at. He's saying that in dominance, 2 judges scored Yasuo slightly below Fier, and the third judge scored Yasuo 2 points above him. Was he losing the fight by a small margin, or was he making Fierach his b***h? Apparently the decision is split.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:46 pm
I was going to say that judges may score different so having varying margins should be expected, but I went back and looked at our scoring in HoH last year, and a lot of our scores were all within 1-3 points of one another, across the panel for all three judges.
So we didn't suffer from wild variances too often.
EDIT:: That's what I thought, Jello. But he brought up something about points and Yasuo winning, and I'm still sort of out of it. So it went from "o i c" to "wait.. wat."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:48 pm
Vintrict Actually, I agree. There have been a lot more ties than normal, but this is probably because after counting up the individual grades, it came out as such. I'll at least speak on my behalf: ties are usually a surprise for me. Cause when you're grading each individual area, you're not thinking about totals. You shouldn't, anyway. Quote: Judge Three Hoshiko: Grammar (4.5)/ Conciseness (4)/ Roleplaying (5)/ Strategy (4.5)/ Dominance (3) = 21 Joel: Grammar (4)/ Conciseness (4)/ Roleplaying (4.5)/ Strategy (4)/ Dominance (4.5) = 21 Winner: Tie Okay. Understandable. Quote: Judge Two Hoshiko: Grammar (5)/ Conciseness (4)/ Roleplaying (3)/ Strategy (3)/ Dominance (2.5) = 17.5 Joel: Grammar (5)/ Conciseness (4)/ Roleplaying (3)/ Strategy (3)/ Dominance (2.5) = 17.5 Winner: Tie Even. Even. Even. Even. Even. What?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:48 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:50 pm
But again, I can't get over the hyperbole in the least, that two judges would deem a single fighter winner and one would deem that fighter the loser, and the 2nd takes priority due to having a radically different view of the fight for some reason.
Dominance was just an example, but an apt one, in that two judges saw James as the fight controller by a marginal amount, while one for some reason saw YOS as the fight paragon. This bleeds over into other stats as well. Take the third judge's score (which they added up wrong on Yas's score, should be 20.5) - what if those 2 points were subtracted? Or.. 1 point? Or 1.5 point?
And that's just in -one- category, I understand how subjective a scoring is, but when two judges see Fighter A as dominating just barely, and one judge sees Fighter B as wiping the floor with Fighter A, I'd be very confused as to how that's possible. Because subjectivity in a judging only goes so far beyond the objective range.
And I still cannot accept such a radical amount of individual tie votes.
Say Judge 1 said Fighter A won, and Judge 2 said Fighter B won, so Judge 3 has to tiebreak. That makes sense. That's why they're judged in 3's to begin with.
Judge 1 going ".. I dunno. ******** it, I can't tell who won overall." And Judge 2 going "..yeah, same, gonna go play Call of Duty. ******** this s**t." only for the third judge to get absolute authority on who wins the match when as demonstrated above, apparently it's a common pattern that one judge radically differs from the other two, seems... absurd.
I'd make my case further but I really can't afford to spend anymore time not working on my school work right now, but I'd seriously keep this in mind. The judging system utilized this year's been a bust and the mounting frustration / bizarre number of forfeits should demonstrate that point for me.
Back to writing about some bullshit I don't care about. [Rubs forehead.]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:54 pm
The Darth Vizzle I have no idea what the ******** Hael is getting at. If he's suggesting That Yasuo should win because he got more points, that's dumb. We've been over that; judge majority rules.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:54 pm
The Darth Vizzle a lot of our scores were all within 1-3 points of one another, across the panel for all three judges. That's actually bigger than I'd hope to see, usually. Or maybe I'm just disillusioned about how things are. First year of HoH the numbers ended up being like 0.5 - 1.5 points of total difference between all 3 judges and at most one fight of one match ended up having one judge come up with a different winner. Consistency.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
