Talk Fantasy Football

VoodooMike wrote:PS: why does this forum always change your name to "Bum Monkey" in quotes?

lol - because there's an auto-correct running on the site from P.o.d.f.r.e.y. to Bum Monkey. As for why, you'll have to direct that to the mods/admins for an answer

Just asking,
Mike - you said you've looked at the data extensively.
Does that include some sort of frequency calculation?
Because - as you know - a million 1's, followed by a million 2's, then a million 3's etc. would still yield the magical 3.5

Cheers
Martin

plasmoid wrote:Just asking,
Mike - you said you've looked at the data extensively.
Does that include some sort of frequency calculation?
Because - as you know - a million 1's, followed by a million 2's, then a million 3's etc. would still yield the magical 3.5

I've looked at the code used to generate the random numbers - the random numbers are not in a range of 1 to 6, they're in the range of 0 to 4,294,967,295 - those random numbers are then run through a second piece of code that converts it into a number from 1 to 6. The RNG in question is a well known algorithm that has been studied rigorously and which is considered to be a source of high quality random numbers. Thus, the only thing that needs to be questioned is the functions that convert the RNG output into the ultimate results, which is why I posted a chart of all possible RNG outputs run through those functions.

When you have the de facto algorithm used to create data, you don't need data samples. The point of statistics is to acquire information about a system you are unable to access directly and fully: you can roll a die a million times to investigate its balance... or you could use special equipment to physically analyze it to determine if it has an imbalance. The latter precludes the need for the former, while the former can only give you clues as to what the latter could conclusively find.

Analysis of the code supported what statistical data had already pointed to - that there was not an issue with the RNG or its conversion into dice rolls.

Podfrey wrote:

VoodooMike wrote:PS: why does this forum always change your name to "Bum Monkey" in quotes?

lol - because there's an auto-correct running on the site from P.o.d.f.r.e.y. to Bum Monkey. As for why, you'll have to direct that to the mods/admins for an answer

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=30456&hilit=bum+monkey

ROFLMAO, so who was it that changed my subtitle to 'apprentice darkson' thad? I had it coming in all honesty.
'Hello my name is inkpwn and I am a TFF troll-aholic.'

Thadrin wrote:viewtopic.php?f=21&t=30456&hilit=bum+monkey

Ah, well that explains it. The time between then and now is pretty extensive - maybe the forum autocorrect should not simply replace his name with bum monkey, but instead replace it with bum monkey that hyperlinks to that thread, for good measure.

inkpwn wrote:ROFLMAO, so who was it that changed my subtitle to 'apprentice darkson' thad? I had it coming in all honesty.
'Hello my name is inkpwn and I am a TFF troll-aholic.'

That might have been me...

Well it did make me laugh first time I noticed

My main problem with BB:LE is that there will never be an XBox version. Seriously, it's a PC game and all an XBox is is a PC game computer! Why is the conversion so hard/impossible? At least make the 11 new !! teams downloadable for a fee like the Dark Elves were.

< ducks thrown rotten vegetables >