Suggestion for next tournament !

ronga wrote:

greenninja wrote:

just use random program that choose between 1-6 digit.. i think its fair enough

Take out 1-4 digits. The server never generates 1-4 digits.

im actually interested in this information too. how do you know that the server does not generate 1-4 digits seeds?

The effect on changing seeds per round.

Differential in results based on round 1 seeds vs new seeds assigned

Fight........................................Round 2 seeds winner......Round 1 seeds winner....Invalid
knr155 vs r0x0rje:..........................knr155..................................knr155................no...
nyghtshado vs spenser95..............nyghtshado............................spenser95............yes...
bijiqkontolz-v54 vs hober..................hober...................................hober.................no...
bigred164 vs evil-drain..................bigred164...............................evil-drain...........yes...
kimbo-tyson vs maddoff09............maddoff09............................maddoff09.............no...
chikara vs jesus-i-am.......................chikara................................chikara...............no...
badboy2234123 vs katsudo..............katsudo...............................katsudo...............no...
gravure97 vs prototype57..............gravure97...........................prototype57..........yes...
brute-031 vs c-a-t-o-2-0-0-8.......c-a-t-o-2-0-0-8.......................c-a-t-o-2-0-0-8.......no...
LilJazzY052 vs iksyrb.......................iksyrb...................................iksyrb................no...
fierymalace vs jhaezon.gago.........fierymalace...........................fierymalace...........no...
keepkilling vs nafigator................keepkilling..............................keepkilling...........no...
onehitted vs nobassac...................onehitted.............................nobassac.............yes...
piston-naga vs kiwiman-ii............piston-naga...........................piston-naga...........no...
hollowcreep vs bijiqkontolz-v74...bijiqkontolz-v74.....................bijiqkontolz-v74......no...
clsk-12 vs tobiiii.............................clsk-12.................................clsk-12...............no...
scissormelol vs r4nd0m051........scissormelol............................scissormelol..........no...
crazy-chika vs cobis..................crazy-chika............................crazy-chika...........no...
robziejjq vs 46fa.........................robziejjq.................................46fa.................yes...
d4rkh3r4ld vs KetchupMeyo........d4rkh3r4ld.........................KetchupMeyo..........yes...
time-please vs knr49......................knr49.............................time-please..........yes...
gem-star vs blairqua....................blairqua...............................blairqua..............no...
knr047 vs highpq..........................knr047...............................knr047................no...
mr-evo vs 1925-0815-04a..........1925-0815-04a..................1925-0815-04a.........no...
waide vs ylli-17...............................waide................................ylli-17..............yes...

Invalid Round 3 Fights
------------------------
c-a-t-o-2-0-0-8 vs nyghtshado (nyghtshado lost using 1st round seeds)
robziejjq vs clsk-12 (robziejjq lost using 1st round seeds)
d4rkh3r4ld vs hober (d4rkh3r4ld lost using 1st round seeds)
gravure97 vs crazy-chika (gravure97 lost using 1st round seeds)
knr047 vs onehitted (onehitted lost using 1st round seeds)
waide vs blairqua (waide lost using 1st round seeds)
bigredflash01 vs knr49 (knr49 lost using 1st round seeds)

Valid Round 3 Fights
------------------------
Fight..................................Round 3 seeds winner......Round 1 seeds winner....Invalid
chikara vs bigred164.....................chikara...........................chikara.............. no...
iksyrb vs bijiqkontolz-v74...............iksyrb.............................iksyrb................no...
1925-0815-04a vs maddoff09........madoff09.......................madoff09..............no...
piston-naga vs fierymalace.........piston-naga......................piston-naga...........no...
keepkilling vs katsudo................keepkilling........................ keepkilling...........no...
knr155 vs scissormelol..............scissormelol........................knr155...............yes...


Invalid Round 4 Fights
------------------------
scissormelol vs waide (waide lost using 1st round seeds)
clsk-12 vs chikara (clsk-12 advanced against an invalid opponent)
hober vs keepkilling (hober advanced against an invalid opponent)
iksyrb vs c-a-t-o-2-0-0-8 (c-a-t-o-2-0-0-8 advanced against an invalid opponent)
piston-naga vs bigredflash01 (bigredflash01 advanced against an invalid opponent)
onehitted vs maddoff09 (onehitted lost using 1st round seeds)


Valid Round 4 Fights
------------------------
None.

All current fighters have either lost using 1st round seeds or have advanced by fighting an opponent who would've been eliminated using 1st round seeds the round before their match took place.

Total Fights: 31
1st round seed wins negated by new seeds: 9 (30% of fights produced different result)

i think we need to not have bye rounds

Can you create a separate category under My Brute that says
Arena - Community Tournaments and move all of these threads into that for a better location as it really doesn't apply to "General Discussions".

sprstoner wrote:

i think we need to not have bye rounds

Yeah, I definitely don't think having bye rounds is a good idea.
If there is an uneven number of participants then brutes should be randomly selected and play a single eliminator or best of three as a play in into the tourney until the number of participates are trimmed to 32-64-128 bracket format.

Having bye's, especially at the quarterfinal bracket level gives a huge unfair advantage.

my response to your arguement

im going to use a real life example to make my point: Lakers won (2:1) against Cavs on May 5th.
(seed1 = may 5th) (seed2= may 6th)

and your theory of "re-run round1 using round2's seeds" is like saying
go watch the tapes of LA vs. Cavs games on May 5th but insert the CD that labelled May 6th instead.
of course its going to be a different result.

if we are using your constant-seed method: your trying to find whos the best NBA team that play on May 5th (remember that may 5th is the seed here). which is not the case in this tourny.

HUH?
You're CD example makes absolutely no sense as a defense for needing to change the seeds.

Here is your Lakers vs Cavaliers scenario.
Game 1: Lakers won on May 5th (seed 1).
Game 2: Cavaliers won on May 6th (seed 2).
Game 3: Cavaliers won on May 7th (seed 3).

So you can't use the same three seeds when the Cavaliers play against the Celtics on May 8th, 9th and 10th?
Are you seriously suggesting that the Cavaliers will win games 2 and 3 against the Celtics because they won against the Lakers using those seeds?

The tourney is single elimination, so there is no way the same two brutes could meet in a later round.
The seeds only affect the outcome of the fight between those two brutes and ONLY THOSE TWO BRUTES.
Using the same seeds doesn't mean the brutes will fight the exact same fight against a different opponent.

If I used seed #678901 and fight against two different opponents, my brute would not fight the same way, use the same skills in the same order and make the same attacks and guarantee the same result because the opponents are different.

Keeping the seeds the same put the brutes on an even keel from a control standpoint.
You're running a single elimination tournament with the same variable being the same 3 seeds and by changing the seeds you're tossing out your control variable and making the tourney a product of chaos theory and not a true
representation of a subset.

As I have PROVEN.... changing the seeds alone created a butterfly effect from the second round that cause every fight in the fourth round to be a product of an invalid state.

heroinmonkey wrote:

Here is your Lakers vs Cavaliers scenario.
Game 1: Lakers won on May 5th (seed 1).
Game 2: Cavaliers won on May 6th (seed 2).
Game 3: Cavaliers won on May 7th (seed 3).

So you can't use the same three seeds when the Cavaliers play against the Celtics on May 8th, 9th and 10th?
Are you seriously suggesting that the Cavaliers will win games 2 and 3 against the Celtics because they won against the Lakers using those seeds?

Yes. this how betting work. If you have 3 team with similar records.
team1 won against team2 with (2:1), then if team1 will go against team3 (the bet is that team1 will likely to beat team3).
where do you put your money if you are presented with the following bet? knowing that team1 beat team2 in previous match.
team2 vs. team3
team1 vs. team3 <--- im going to put my money on team1

heroinmonkey wrote:

HUH?
If I used seed #678901 and fight against two different opponents, my brute would not fight the same way, use the same skills in the same order and make the same attacks and guarantee the same result because the opponents are different.

of course, this is obvious.
Lakers vs Cavs on May 5th
Lakers vs Celtics on May 5th
they will have different result.

heroinmonkey wrote:

Keeping the seeds the same put the brutes on an even keel from a control standpoint.
You're running a single elimination tournament with the same variable being the same 3 seeds and by changing the seeds you're tossing out your control variable and making the tourney a product of chaos theory and not a true representation of a subset.

hm, you are seeing the purpose of the seeds in a wrong way.

just for an argument sake, say we only have 100 seeds in the simulator. best scenario is to run every round using all 100 seeds avaiable. but we dont have the time to do this right? therefore we are going to pick 3 out of 100 seeds available, and generalized the result based on that seeds.

if we are using constant-seed: We are trying to find who is the best brute in the tourny that uses seed 1.

if we are using dynamic-seed: We are trying to find who is the best brute in the tourny if we are using the whole 100 seeds (HOWEVER, due to time constraint, we can only run 3 seeds...but we pick the seeds randomly to avoid favoritism to some brute who have advantage if we use a specific seed).

if your argument is, who ever will win the current tourny, that brute does not have a guarantee to win against someone who got knocked off on round1.
well, my response is: of course there is no 100% guarantee the champion will win in this case, because we are only simulating 3 out of 100 seeds available. However, the champion brute have at least 30% odds on him.

if you want to find 100% certainty. why dont you run your own tournament that uses 100 seeds on every round.

we want to simulate the fights using different seeds to ensure we can find the best brute in the tourny thru-out the season, not in one particular day.
bcos similar to brute, NBA players performance is different on each day (they are random to some degree, of course having Kobe Bryant in your team is similar having a Wolf/Bear+Armor in your brute).

heroinmonkey wrote:

HUH?
You're CD example makes absolutely no sense as a defense for needing to change the seeds.
As I have PROVEN.... changing the seeds alone created a butterfly effect from the second round that cause every fight in the fourth round to be a product of an invalid state.

im not really a fan of concluding the argument/discussion after you made your own point, you have to respect your opponent to response to your arguments first. but since you are doing it, i might as well.

HUH?
Your response to my CD example makes absolutely no sense and you are missing the point.
My CD example is not a defense for needing to change the seeds, but merely an example of how you see things are.
Well, heroinmonkey as i have PROVEN again... changing the seeds alone does not necessarily cause every fight in the fourth round to be a product of an invalid state.

my point..

kazuya_gonzalez wrote:

heroinmonkey wrote:

I can pretty much guarantee that once this tourney is over, I can take the final round seeds and have the champion fight against a brute that lost in the first round actually beat the "champion" with the new seeds.

maybe..

just like senegal and france in soccer .. france lost to senegal 0-1

but if france have match again with senegal , i think france will win ^_^ in soccer.. (in this case the match in the other day (this is how the seeds will work))

just an example

seed is like the time we have a match..

before at the chat hours ago, heroin monkey says it was a variable in a match , he set an example like this..
by using different seed he says.. that the first match will be using a ball and the second match will be using basketball

but i say no.. why? are u forgot we fight at same level, same weapon, and same skill as always like the brute has it.. it doesn't change the weapon, skill.

i think, seed is like the time when we fight

i mean like this

seed 1 = 1 may : 1 am , seed 2 = 1 may : 2 am, seed 3 = 1 may : 3 am

seed 4 = 2 may : 1 am, seed 5 = 2 may : 2 am, seed 6 = 2 may : 3 am

so of we use same / constant seed it will be a match between seed 1 = 1 may : 1 am , seed 2 = 1 may : 2 am, seed 3 = 1 may : 3 am until the final right?

What the....?
1. Disproving your betting scenario as it applies to a single elimination tourney.
( You can't have a 3 team scenario btw under tourney logic because after each match one of the two teams are eliminated so it's an impossibility for the winners to have an opponent in common.)

a) Team A beats Team B 2-1
b) Team C beats Team D 2-1
c) Team A then is scheduled to play Team C

There is no way you can make a logical conclusion as to who will beat who based on the fact that neither Team A or Team C have an common opponent.

2. "..but we pick the seeds randomly to avoid favoritism to some brute who have advantage if we use a specific seed."

Another logical fallacy, there is no conclusive evidence that a single seed benefits a brute against an assortment of brutes.
The only constant is the outcome of a seed when compared against the same 2 brutes.

Here is another example of faulty logic:
Brute A wins using seed #123456 against Brute B.
Brute B wins using seed #123456 against Brute C.
You're suggesting that Brute A is always guaranteed to beat Brute C using seed #123456 because Brute A beat Brute B and Brute B beat C.

3. Again, I am going to OVERSTATE that creating new seeds throws out the control variable.
You start with 64 teams and using 3 seeds 32 teams advance based on those seeds.
How can you logically compare the remaining 32 brutes without using the same seeds?
When you replace the seeds, you remove the ONLY constant variable that associates the two brutes within that round.
By changing the seeds you're no longer running a tournament because you removed the only constant variable that led the brutes to even be in the current round.
(Not even going to go into the implications of not having a fixed bracket but randomized pairings per round because that alone exemplies the butterfly effect)

As an example to demonstrate odds:
The NCAA holds their March Madness basketball tourney using a fixed bracket of 64 teams.
The odds of someone accurately predicting the bracket from start to finish is 1 in 9 MILLION TRILLION. Now if they were to randomize each round, the number would be even far more astronomical of predicting a perfect bracket.

4. if you want to find 100% certainty. why dont you run your own tournament that uses 100 seeds on every round.
That statement alone proves my point.

Using a tournment bracket of 64 participants.
Using the same 3 seeds:
Total fights needed to compete tourney: 186

Total fights needed to run for a round robin of best of 3 for all seeds: 12,096
Percentage of accuracy in the winner matching should all fights be completed: 1.53%

Using 3 new seeds each round.
Total fights needed to run for a round robin of best 3 for all seeds: 72,576
Percentage of accuracy in the winner matching should all fights be completed: 0.02%

5.we want to simulate the fights using different seeds to ensure we can find the best brute in the tourny thru-out the season, not in one particular day.
Again, how does this even factor in as a defense for changing seeds?

You can't say that you're limiting seeds to a certain number (Your 1-100 seeds) because you've used seed number #235521

So if you're saying the season will consist of seeds 1 to 235,521 then you're saying there will only be 39,254 tourneys if you remove the seed from the pool once it has been used already in a tournament.

6. "...bcos similar to brute, NBA players performance is different on each day"
If you used the same seed for one brute against every brute in existence, your brute will fight differently each time. AGAIN... there is NO EVIDENCE THAT SUGGESTS A BRUTE FIGHTS BETTER WHEN A CERTAIN SEED IS USED EXCEPT WHEN THAT SEED IS USED BETWEEN THE SAME TWO BRUTES.

If fotom fights piston-naga with a certain seed number, fotom WILL NOT FIGHT THE SAME when using the same seed against ANOTHER brute.

Honestly, I don't see how much more clearer I can explain this... so either you comprehend it or you don't.

I have proven statistically and through fight examples of how changing the seeds increases not only the disparity but the validity of the tourney.

In conclusion my stance is that the tourney would reflect a more accurate representation should the same three seeds be used in every round for that particular tourney. And in the next tourney, 3 new seeds should be created and used throughout that tourney.

heroinmonkey wrote:

What the....?
1. Disproving your betting scenario as it applies to a single elimination tourney.
( You can't have a 3 team scenario btw under tourney logic because after each match one of the two teams are eliminated so it's an impossibility for the winners to have an opponent in common.)

a) Team A beats Team B 2-1
b) Team C beats Team D 2-1
c) Team A then is scheduled to play Team C

There is no way you can make a logical conclusion as to who will beat who based on the fact that neither Team A or Team C have an common opponent.

of course, in a single elimination you cant have a 3 team scenario. remember im responding to your own question (see spoiler). And now you expanding the scenario differently. We now have Team A,B,C,D instead of LA, Cavs, and Celtics.

My response for your Team A,B,C,D scenario. There is no way we can predict who will win when Team A and Team C meet. But, those 2 teams earn their spot on the second round. Because they beat the previous opponent fair and square. There is always a luck factor in the tournament you know, ever being in the tournament that you got knocked off at round1 but your friend went to round5 (and you know that you beat your friend several time before and you think that you deserve his round5's spot). Well tough luck, you got paired with a tough opponent and he always paired with easy opponent.

Spoiler:

heroinmonkey wrote:

2. Here is another example of faulty logic:
Brute A wins using seed #123456 against Brute B.
Brute B wins using seed #123456 against Brute C.
You're suggesting that Brute A is always guaranteed to beat Brute C using seed #123456 because Brute A beat Brute B and Brute B beat C.

"Always guaranteed" is not the right word to choose for this type of game, heroin. And its not the word i would choose either.
But to answer your question, yes. BruteA will have more chance of winning if he is fighting BruteC. wheres your logical thinking??
Mike Tyson can beat fotum
fotum can beat heroinmonkey
Will Mike Tyson more likely to beat heroinmonkey? you damn right he will have more chance, Tyson can beat fotum who apparently trumps heroin. duh?

heroinmonkey wrote:

3. As an example to demonstrate odds:
The NCAA holds their March Madness basketball tourney using a fixed bracket of 64 teams.
The odds of someone accurately predicting the bracket from start to finish is 1 in 9 MILLION TRILLION. Now if they were to randomize each round, the number would be even far more astronomical of predicting a perfect bracket.

We are not using Bracket system in this tournament. Beside we didnt know whos are our top-ranked brutes (NCAA's term is top-seeded team). You have to go thru a league with a round robin first to determine the top-ranked brutes before we can use NCAA's bracket tourny system here. Therefore, your argument here is not related of what we are talking about.

heroinmonkey wrote:

4. if you want to find 100% certainty. why dont you run your own tournament that uses 100 seeds on every round.
That statement alone proves my point.

Using a tournment bracket of 64 participants.
Using the same 3 seeds:
Total fights needed to compete tourney: 186

Total fights needed to run for a round robin of best of 3 for all seeds: 12,096
Percentage of accuracy in the winner matching should all fights be completed: 1.53%

Using 3 new seeds each round.
Total fights needed to run for a round robin of best 3 for all seeds: 72,576
Percentage of accuracy in the winner matching should all fights be completed: 0.02%

heroinmonkey wrote:

You can't say that you're limiting seeds to a certain number (Your 1-100 seeds) because you've used seed number #235521

So if you're saying the season will consist of seeds 1 to 235,521 then you're saying there will only be 39,254 tourneys if you remove the seed from the pool once it has been used already in a tournament.

huh?? pls re-read it again. i dont think you get it.
im saying that the simulator only have 100 simulations (seeds) for each fight, you can only put number 1 to 100 in that seed input box. you can NOT put 6 digits number into the seed input box. Remember i say this for an argument sake, now if you got what i mean when i say 1 to 100, re read that argument again and then proceed below.

heroinmonkey wrote:

6. AGAIN... there is NO EVIDENCE THAT SUGGESTS A BRUTE FIGHTS BETTER WHEN A CERTAIN SEED IS USED EXCEPT WHEN THAT SEED IS USED BETWEEN THE SAME TWO BRUTES.

i thought u are a better mathematician than that? let me break it down for you.

scenario: we have 3 brutes to fight each other (round robin style).

(seed1) bruteA wins all 3 fight = he will have 9pts
(seed1) bruteB win 1 fight = he will have 3pts
(seed1) bruteC win no fight he will have 0pts

(seed2) bruteA win no fight = he will have 0pts
(seed2) bruteB win 1 fight = he will have 3pts
(seed2) bruteC wins 3 fight he will have 9pts

(seed3) bruteA win no fight = he will have 0pts
(seed3) bruteB win 1 fight = he will have 3pts
(seed3) bruteC wins 3 fight he will have 9pts

if we are using constant seeding method, you will announce bruteA as your winner.
if we are using dynamic seeds method, the real winner is bruteC.

Now, lets expand the above concept with 64 players.
each player will play 63 times and the maximum points that they can get is 189 per seed (let say that there is only 100 seeds in the simulator).
1. brute1 wins 63 times when fighting using seed1, but he lost to all of his other fights. so his total point is 189
2. brute3 wins no fight when fighting using seed1, but he wins all other fights in the tourny. so his total point is 18,711

whos the real champion here? brute3 right?

if we are using constant-seed in the tourny, your champion is brute1.
if we are using dynamic-seed in the tourny, our champion is brute3.

Altought there is no concrete evidence, but its safely assume based on the statistics provide. If you join a Level 50 Championship that uses constant-seeding method (they are going to use seed1), which opponent will scare you more? brute1 or brute3 ??

heroinmonkey wrote:

If fotom fights piston-naga with a certain seed number, fotom WILL NOT FIGHT THE SAME when using the same seed against ANOTHER brute.
Honestly, I don't see how much more clearer I can explain this... so either you comprehend it or you don't.

why are you telling me this? of course they WILL NOT FIGHT THE SAME. are you trying to put those idea into my mouth?

remember, im the one who gave you the following example:
Lakers won (2:1) against Cavs on May 5th (seed1 = may 5th) (seed2 = may 6th).

and you are trying to tell me, If fotom fights piston-naga on May 5th, fotom WILL NOT FIGHT THE SAME when fotom fights heroinmonkey on May 5th. of course he will not fight the same, the opponent is totally different.

i like the new random seeds each round

sprstoner wrote:

i like the new random seeds each round

agreed
its not rocket science

just sit back and enjoy

there will be another tourney if you get beat in this one

1. Battle at 1 seed (3 seed max):
2 brutes with lvl 50 or 1 brute battles at lvl 50 and 100

So, It means 6 battles

level 40

As the thread tittle says

my sugestion is.. im hoping for the next tourney will be a team battle

2 vs 2.. aint dat posible?

Jazz™ wrote:

2 vs 2.. aint dat posible?

It's possible, but we should save that for another tournament, I want one more solo tourney.

ohh ok

I think EVERY FIGHT should have it's own seed since fotum believes using the same seed for every round caused an unfair advantage.

» Prepare a brute that really going to be strong brute for each level 20, 30, and final level 50.

» Arrange brutes to fight with random seed (the result will be posted in this thread) at level 20, 30, and 50. Let say, two brute fight each other.
Example:
Gainare Vs Anabaz at Level 20 Gainare won Level 20
Gainare Vs Anabaz at Level 30 Anabaz won
Level 30
Gainare Vs Anabaz at Level 50-1st fight Anabaz won
Level 50-1st
Gainare Vs Anabaz at Level 50-2nd fight Anabaz won
Level 50-2nd

The winner is Anabaz. if in 2nd fight gainare won, there will be final round in 50-3rd match.
If a brute won in level 20 and 30, there will be no more level 50 match. Strong brute come from lower level, there is no point for a brute weak at the lower level but strong at 50 or 100 level, it's hard to keep your brute level up rapidly.

» Seed for the match will be different (random) for each fight.

1. Best of 3
2. finals round (quarter and semi-final) Best of 5
3. Max 2 brutes is good