Lucas Garron
Administrator
Although these lists are missing one important person.333/sq1 single:
Although these lists are missing one important person.333/sq1 single:
Although these lists are missing one important person.
Who has the highest number of solves without any DNF?
285 Zbigniew Zborowski
206 Matteo Provasi
182 Yi-Sa Chen (陳以撒)
157 Andrew Sopchak
155 Tam Ming Ki
139 Josh Rotholz
110 Vincent Hartanto Utomo
104 Stefan Kodrnja
103 Grant Tregay
102 Amier Edy Adlan Bin Sanusi
select
sum((value1>0) + (value2>0) + (value3>0) + (value4>0) + (value5>0)) solves,
sum((value1=-1) + (value2=-1) + (value3=-1) + (value4=-1) + (value5=-1)) dnfs,
personName
from results
group by personId
order by 2, 1 desc
s/dnf solve dnf who
---------------------------------------------
462.0 462 1 Ryan Patricio
440.0 440 1 James Creswell
371.5 743 2 Dene Beardsley
274.0 274 1 Cristobal Correa del Valle
260.0 260 1 Agustín Díaz Morón
256.0 256 1 Neel Shah
224.0 224 1 Daniel Hayes
206.2 1031 5 Dave Campbell
189.0 189 1 Christian Guillén López
188.0 188 1 Lennart Aspelin
What percentage of people had their first ever 3x3 solve a DNF?
What percentage of people had their first ever 3x3 solve a DNF? Me and my friend would be 2 of those people
I think it's one of those necessary mysteries of life.Completely his own fault. If he can solve megaminx, I'm sure he can solve 3x3x3 (why doesn't he, btw?).
733 (first attempt). And another 22 have DNS on their first attempt.
select count(value1=-1 or null) dnfFirst, count(value1=-2 or null) dnsFirst from
results, competitions, rounds,
(select personId, min((year-1980)*1000000+month*10000+day*100+rounds.rank) r
from results, competitions, rounds
where eventId='333' and competitions.id=competitionId and rounds.id=roundId
group by personId) x
where eventId='333' and competitions.id=competitionId and rounds.id=roundId
and results.personId=x.personId and x.r=(year-1980)*1000000+month*10000+day*100+rounds.rank
Of course we wouldn't count it towards the "amount of time spent solving" statistic. I was saying that it would make more sense to me to count DNFs in the "number of solves between X date and Y date" statistic.DNF is an "attempt", but no "solve" (at least usually). Ok, you could say it's "solve time" in the sense of time spent *trying* to solve. But the other reason to not count it is that we just don't have the data
Huh. I guess it's a lot easier to epic fail at megaminx than to epic fail at 4x4.Single (top until under 1/1, and bottom 10):
Code:444/mi 444 minx who ----------------------------------------------- 1.4718 162.86 110.65 Irène Mallordy 0.0979 55.38 565.46 Chris Hardwick
hahahahahaha oh wow333/sq1 single:
Code:0.0270 10.30 381.01 Chia-Wei Lu
o_0And another 22 have DNS on their first attempt.
Huh. I guess it's a lot easier to epic fail at megaminx than to epic fail at 4x4.
I guess you could say that, although it's not quite as bad as 1.4718 compared to 0.0979. Remember megaminx has higher times than 4x4x4 in general, so ratio 1.0000 doesn't mean you're equally good at both, only that you take the same time for both. Maybe each should first be divided by the world record average, and then we take the ratio of that.
Or you could go by percentile (1-[rank/total competitors]), since the WRs are outliers in their own way.
That's probably a better way becuase only 2 people are sub-1 on megaminx, so the WR avg is very low, relative of course
Taking percentiles doesn't represent the same level of skill either
Woah, yeah, I remember you used to be relatively fast at it, allowing you to get WR 3 times.