ryanj92
Veteran
I'm not in the top 300 reguarly, and I'm 224th in KinchRanksKinchRank 261 vs 181 and 251 for single and average ranks.
Whose rank (within the top 300, or whatever...) increased the most? Decreased the most?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I'm not in the top 300 reguarly, and I'm 224th in KinchRanksKinchRank 261 vs 181 and 251 for single and average ranks.
Whose rank (within the top 300, or whatever...) increased the most? Decreased the most?
Ah thanks, I understand now I guess. I actually wouldn't agree that 3.20 even requires CLL. Good ortega scrambles could achieve that. I think the effect is not so much that 2x2 inherently has a small numerator, but rather that the best averages are likely to be lucky and better than e.g. the general home average of theirs.Consider this simple example -- to get a 50% score in 2x2, you need to have a 3.20 average. That takes quite a bit of skill, and likely takes knowing some EG, at the very least CLL. To get the same score in 5x5, you need to have a 1:48.40 average. That's a considerably easier level to attain -- and it's just because the numerator for 2x2 is so small. It's even sillier for FMC -- getting that score takes a solve of 40, or a mean of 50, which someone can do having never tried an FMC attempt, assuming basic 3x3 knowledge.
I do agree though -- It is rather desirable that the score function for an event is convex, but I'm just arguing that it may be a bit too convex. I do see the appeal for ease of interpretability though, and I'm starting to see how applying logs is just getting arbitrary.
Thanks for the update on the main post - cool to see how the countries compare to each other. All the more confirmation that Poland is a huge cubing powerhouse - even the huge populations and competitive depth of the United States and China can't overcome Polish talent
Mostly as a personal request (getting something like this set up would take quite a few more resources, I'd imagine), but I'd love to see how people compare within their regions (like how sum of ranks is set up on the WCA site). We now know how strong the regions are compared to each other - but how strong am I within my region? I can calculate my own regional KinchRanks without too much difficulty (not including the 3bld and 3fm mean change, my score is 45.38 in NA), but how does that rank against the rest of NA?
WCA page is an eventual consideration. I didn't suggest it immediately as I wanted to continue discussing it for some time first to make sure it's right. Indeed this thread has helped a lot, so thanks everyone for the feedback.I like this. Is it possible for this to be on the WCA page along with sum of ranks? If not, it would be really nice if it were hosted on the web somewhere. I would also like to be able to see ranks within each country (with respect to NRs instead of WRs).
Edit: http://hem.bredband.net/_zlv_/rubiks/stats/kinch_ranks.html (thanks Kit) (still waiting on by country though!)
Yes, indeed the Polish bld skills really come to light once you treat them as equal events to all others!
On the topic of regional KinchRanks: I actually don't like them too much, because you end up comparing against NRs, which are much more volatile and also prone to biases within countries. It's a nice rank for sure, but it's not quite as objective as comparing to WRs. Ideally I wouldn't use WRs at all in the calculation, but it is the concession I have to make to provide a benchmark that is as close to equal from event to event as possible. So using CRs and NRs is a further step away from the theoretical perfect benchmark, but still provides nice rankings.
I may have a look into that sometime - sounds interesting. Or else you could do some correlation analysis yourselfRelated to this, I'm somewhat curious what events are most strongly correlated to each other - as in, if I'm good at [some event], what events am I most likely to also be good in, or what events am I most likely to do poorly in? For example, it seems that a good 333mbf score translates almost always to great 333bf/444bf/555bf scores, and that 666 and 777 are very similar, but what would feet and Square-1 correlate with?
That does make it sound interesting. I've done UK and US ranks on my website, and I'll add some more soon.I do agree with the negatives with the volatility, and the lack of objective comparison to the "ideal cuber", but the main reason that I'm interested in regional KinchRanks is precisely because of the biases within countries - for example, because Southern California (at least in the past ~7 years) has been rather weak at BLD, there's not much reason for competitions to hold BLD - which, of course, creates a negative feedback loop. Meanwhile, OH is pretty heavily emphasized here, which means that even for someone who doesn't consider themselves very good at OH, the nature of the scene means that one tends to actually be fairly good globally (an easy example here is myself - even when I got sub-20, I didn't consider myself very good because 19 averages rarely podium, but sub-20 is actually pretty good - a KinchRank of >54, and a rank of <577 out of ~9500). Although my example is of a region we probably wouldn't calculate for, it hopefully gives some idea as to why I'm interested in the statistics, even though they deviate somewhat from that comparison with the "ideal" in the normal KinchRanks.
Not sure that the latest public export has your results in. I'm going to aim to update once a week - sometime Weds-Fri so that previous weekend's results are in.Can we have an update with this? I noticed my 2x2 rankings aren't updated
Yes, maybe. I'd have to actually put a bit of effort into that though, as an extra link would be needed from Person to Country and then to Continent as well.Will continental KinchRanks be a thing in the future?