The Official Michigan Brawl Power Rankings: Season 11 Images Up!

[SCOTU]

edit: also, buying spots in bracket should be completely banned imo. That **** isn't fair to any party involved.

Dude, when are you gonna learn that my field of study is the only important one??

used to be* the only important one. Then digital logic was invented and now any problem of any real complexity comes down to my field. Your stuff is only good for coming up with new toys for CSE people to play with

 

[Sailor Princess Twenty-Two.]

Perhaps the TX PR implemented the system wrong or something, but that's the main reason I'm against using it.

 

[Zankoku]

Note that ELO/TrueSkill is based on individual matches, so someone who ***** his way through winners' brackets and then loses twice but still places high stands to gain significantly fewer points than, say, someone who loses first round of winners' and then beats everybody and gets first... it also by nature reduces the weight of smaller tournaments because fewer matches are played.

In the worst case scenario, you can automatically raise everyone's uncertainty level by an amount based on time between tournaments.

 

[ZTD | TECHnology]

Hmm I thought people had remembered that but I guess not. *sighs*

Just take me down as an HM and just continue the PR without me then. I suck too much at this game.

 

[Rabbi Nevins]

edit: also, buying spots in bracket should be completely banned imo. That **** isn't fair to any party involved.



used to be* the only important one. Then digital logic was invented and now any problem of any real complexity comes down to my field. Your stuff is only good for coming up with new toys for CSE people to play with

OHHH MYY GODDD. I have to defend math here even though I love CSE more <3 math is ****. Especially what bowyer studies. Super **** and practical.

But we are all forgetting a true field of study: physics.

My idea for the PR was just a quick suggestion to start a discussion about how this PR should work. Not enough thought goes into the actual design of the PR. Maybe it is time we proposed some new system ideas. One based more on numbers and less on a group of peoples thoughts

 

[Pimp Daddy Supreme]

i just did more reading in this thread than i have during this entire summer so far

 

[Sailor Princess Twenty-Two.]

Prove to me that physics isn't actually a **** ton of coincidences that we believe to have figure out the causes for.

 

[Zankoku]

I believe an ELO/TrueSkill system is pretty good when applied to an isolated local area, or the entire world. Things get much more tricky when it's usually done locally and occasionally done regionally and once in a while applied to nationals, though.

Numerically-based rankings systems are fun to use when people are constantly playing, or if you somehow manage regular attendance at weeklies, but I take more faith in human judgment when it comes to sparser ranking criteria like monthlies. The only issue is selecting the right amount of people to actually rank.

If you really want to have a meaningful power rankings based on human vote, try this - rank people in terms of how scared you are of meeting them in bracket. This removes the possibility of overranking yourself because there's no way you'd be worried about meeting yourself in bracket. Unless you're ChiboSempai.

 

[What's The Point]

I'm against a point system because Tony is, and he's smarter than all of you.

Plus MI is to inconsistent with attendance.

I still say we extend the season to June 4th, and during the extended time get some sort of vote on rankings and/or panelist. This PR was made in haste for reasons I don't remember.

 

[SCOTU]

just, lower entry -> more tourneys. With more creative tournament structures, side events, or things for low placers/newcomers to do.

 

[Zankoku]

I'm against a point system because Tony is, and he's smarter than all of you.

I disagree, with the reasoning that Dan is posting in here.

 

[Pimp Daddy Supreme]

let's have an intelligent PR

 

[Moooose]

OHHH MYY GODDD. I have to defend math here even though I love CSE more <3 math is ****. Especially what bowyer studies. Super **** and practical.

But we are all forgetting a true field of study: physics.

My idea for the PR was just a quick suggestion to start a discussion about how this PR should work. Not enough thought goes into the actual design of the PR. Maybe it is time we proposed some new system ideas. One based more on numbers and less on a group of peoples thoughts

don't forget pure math, the least useful of all majors, on par with art and philosophy

 

[What's The Point]

New HM list would be Bowyer, Tutu, WTP (Alphabetical order) if we just go by immediate revotes. Gio still 5th.

 

[Rabbi Nevins]

fzk is the smartest DUHHHHH. You *****s havent seen the insane papers ive seen that he has written. Then again he has that age factor on us

 

[What's The Point]

fZk is easily the smartest person to have posted on Smashboards.

 

[Sailor Princess Twenty-Two.]

don't forget pure math, the least useful of all majors, on par with art and philosophy

There is no major less useful than philosophy because philosophy provides the foundation for all other majors.

 

[HiddenBowser]

The longest post on this page

New HM list would be Bowyer, Tutu, WTP (Alphabetical order) if we just go by immediate revotes. Gio still 5th.

Alphabetical? You're just angry you're last

Hmm I thought people had remembered that but I guess not. *sighs*

Just take me down as an HM and just continue the PR without me then. I suck too much at this game.

Dude, chill. Have you ever thought about how who play and when you play determines how you place? Ha. You should look at who beat who and who played who. The PR list should be reflective upon who's better than who and who can beat who, not oh I had a bad tournament and may have had bad matchups so I shouldn't be considered..

just, lower entry -> more tourneys. With more creative tournament structures, side events, or things for low placers/newcomers to do.

We should have side tourneys midway through where only people who are out of the tournament already can enter.

There is no major less useful than philosophy because philosophy provides the foundation for all other majors.

No.

don't forget pure math, the least useful of all majors, on par with art and philosophy

Dude, there's still time! You can still switch to Mathematics of Finance and Risk Management! Work for a hedge fund or investment bank instead :D

OHHH MYY GODDD. I have to defend math here even though I love CSE more <3 math is ****. Especially what bowyer studies. Super **** and practical.

<3

used to be* the only important one. Then digital logic was invented and now any problem of any real complexity comes down to my field. Your stuff is only good for coming up with new toys for CSE people to play with

Yeah yeah yeah.. You do have cooler technology to work with.. But my field gets to play with larger sums of money

Awesomeness

In other news, I just found out that my degrees are most likely in fact complete! Just need a language proficiency and an official audit!

University of Michigan
B.S. Economics
B.S. Mathematics of Finance and Risk Management

 

[Pimp Daddy Supreme]

fZK's physics turns me on almost as much as his sexy silky smooth puerto rican voice

 

[ZTD | TECHnology]

Bowyer, I do take that into consideration. The fact that this state is loaded with Metaknights is always going to be a huge obstacle to me. Other people seem to overcome it but I can't seem to. Regardless or MUs or whatever, I'm dropping off the HM list voluntarily. I should be able to not get knocked out of pools if I were good enough to be HM but that isn't the case. I'm pretty being emo but whatever.

 

[What's The Point]

You can't actually drop off the list voluntarily. We ranked Judge and Boxxy last time despite their wishes.

I guess now we just wait for Ori to amend the picture.

 

[HiddenBowser]

I'm pretty being emo but whatever.

ha, a little

 

[Sailor Princess Twenty-Two.]

You say philosophy is useless yet you study economics? What ungrateful children mathematicians have become.

 

[HiddenBowser]

You say philosophy is useless yet you study economics? What ungrateful children mathematicians have become.

Philosophy has a large place in ethics but not in using mathematical models to study human actions.

I've taken a Philosophy of Economics course. It's good to learn once but has very little practicality to real world use. Other than a professor, there's not many professions a philosophy degree will be of much help.

 

[Sailor Princess Twenty-Two.]

A well paying job vs A deeper understanding of the world.

I guess I can see why people choose the former.

 

[What's The Point]

Can't we all just agree that every degree is equally inferior when compared to engineering degrees?

 

[Moooose]

i dont know if i would say the study of philosophy fosters a deeper understanding of a single, real, world. philosophy has alot of guesses and maybe's which usually can't be proved one way or the other. not that its not useful, i think it broadens a students understanding of the possibilities of existence, but you can't possibly say anything with any amount of certainty in philosophy.

 

[Pimp Daddy Supreme]

Can't we all just agree that every degree is equally inferior when compared to engineering degrees?

Oh god. Please. All engineers do is apply the genius discoveries that physicists and mathematicians make every day.

 

[Zankoku]

So you produce **** and we convert it into fertilizer?

 

[wWw Dazwa]

So you produce **** and we convert it into fertilizer?

 

[SCOTU]

Yeah yeah yeah.. You do have cooler technology to work with.. But my field gets to play with larger sums of money

your field gets to think about larger sums of money, but what do you think actually controls that money? What allows it to be transferred? What allows people to spend money? What simulates whatever you're thinking about with money? What gets contracted for millions of $$ just so that you can think about millions of $$s? Software. ware

 

[Sailor Princess Twenty-Two.]

Moose the same holds true for all sciences. Unless I was lied to in 5th grade (which is entirely possible) there's no such thing as a fact in science, just widely accepted theories and such.

 

[SCOTU]

Moose the same holds true for all sciences. Unless I was lied to in 5th grade (which is entirely possible) there's no such thing as a fact in science, just widely accepted theories and such.

except logic and tautologies. Those define a set of rules and create undeniable facts. Furthermore there exists no argument that can defeat the assumptions of logic, therefore those must also be true.

 

[Sailor Princess Twenty-Two.]

But Scotu... That's Philosophy

 

[Moooose]

Moose the same holds true for all sciences. Unless I was lied to in 5th grade (which is entirely possible) there's no such thing as a fact in science, just widely accepted theories and such.

science is composed of theories which have been tested and verified against the real world. philosophy is composed of theories which are inherently untestable and therefore unverifiable.

nothing against philosophy though, it was always one of my major interests.

 

[SCOTU]

But Scotu... That's Philosophy :ohyeah:

sorry, didn't realize you were arguing for philosophy against sciences. However, note that Computer Science only works with these sorts of facts, so that would be a science that your statement is incorrect for.

 

[Pimp Daddy Supreme]

omgggg

in science when something is called a 'theory' that means there is NO DOUBT it's true. to be called a theory, a hypothesis must be tested out the *** yo

 

[Moooose]

to add to what i said earlier, that's the similarity i was referring to between philosophy and pure mathematics, that they both create ideas and theories which are unverifiable. in the case of pure math, this is due to a disconnect between abstract mathematics and reality, but that doesnt mean its really cool to think about for both cases.

 

[Sailor Princess Twenty-Two.]

I'm arguing that without Philosophy there could be no science.

@Moose- Actually that's a bit of a common misconception, While we can't say there is any definite truth to test philosophical theories against, what we do test it against is logic. Once again though I wouldn't say that science has any definite proof to test theories against either. You say it's the real world... but what is the "real world"? That's a question of philosophy, so without philosophy to create an understanding of what the "real world" is how can you test anything in science?

 

[Moooose]

I'm arguing that without Philosophy there could be no science.

@Moose- Actually that's a bit of a common misconception, While we can't say there is any definite truth to test philosophical theories against, what we do test it against is logic. Once again though I wouldn't say that science has any definite proof to test theories against either. You say it's the real world... but what is the "real world"? That's a question of philosophy, so without philosophy to create an understanding of what the "real world" is how can you test anything in science?

but following the rules of logic you can generate infinitely contradictory philosophical theories, and they can't all be true, so you can't really test them in that sense. for example, from my perspective it is logical that everything the universe is a figment of my imagination, as it is logical from your perspective for the equivalent to be true. Since there is no way to verify which of these is true, and since they can't both be true yet they both follow the rules of logic, we really can't use logic to "test" either of these theories.

As for the idea of a real world...that's exactly what i'm saying. Philosophy asks alot of questions about existence, but has no solid verifiable answers.