- Blind mode tutorial
lichess.org
Donate

3+0 vs 3+2 the difference?

#2

What is the definition of "dubious" ? Do you mean inaccuracies ?

What is the definition of "dubious" ? Do you mean inaccuracies ?
#3

The main and most important difference is that if you're in a winning position, you can premove/move fast and not lose on time in a completely winning position, that's all that matters.

The main and most important difference is that if you're in a winning position, you can premove/move fast and not lose on time in a completely winning position, that's all that matters.
#5

I enjoy your data analysis posts and the illustrations you choose. I would suggest though that for the full power of data analysis sharing, that your work be made reproducible, and that just pointing to the vague database source is not enough, or not helpful.

With the excellent suggestion above, you could have the same author experience, and data analysis tasks, in interactive mode for yourself, and keep track of all the steps of data massaging you might have gone through.

leaving something that might be even augmented by others or yourself. This is not to diminish the value of your ideas, but facilitate scientific communication. Too often in chess data analysis sharing that I have seen and still see in the places I have looked at, one seems satisfied with little in terms of reproducibility by the audience (I have some hypotheses as to why this could have been going for so long, but it is changing, for example lichess itself seems to have taken that bull by some of its horns).

try something like jupiter or other shareable platform.. at least you would not have to describe much more than you are now about how to reproduce. or explain sufficiently so that we could reproduce.

I am jumping to this, in case you are not aware of such possibility and why it might be important, because I find you have good ideas, and good questions to ask of the data, and good result presentation "instinct". If you are starting and keeping that pace, better start with the proper tools.

I enjoy your data analysis posts and the illustrations you choose. I would suggest though that for the full power of data analysis sharing, that your work be made reproducible, and that just pointing to the vague database source is not enough, or not helpful. With the excellent suggestion above, you could have the same author experience, and data analysis tasks, in interactive mode for yourself, and keep track of all the steps of data massaging you might have gone through. leaving something that might be even augmented by others or yourself. This is not to diminish the value of your ideas, but facilitate scientific communication. Too often in chess data analysis sharing that I have seen and still see in the places I have looked at, one seems satisfied with little in terms of reproducibility by the audience (I have some hypotheses as to why this could have been going for so long, but it is changing, for example lichess itself seems to have taken that bull by some of its horns). try something like jupiter or other shareable platform.. at least you would not have to describe much more than you are now about how to reproduce. or explain sufficiently so that we could reproduce. I am jumping to this, in case you are not aware of such possibility and why it might be important, because I find you have good ideas, and good questions to ask of the data, and good result presentation "instinct". If you are starting and keeping that pace, better start with the proper tools.
#6

The difference is easy to find!
3+0=3 3+2=5

The difference is easy to find! 3+0=3 3+2=5
#7

@The_Inverse_Tangent said in #6:

The difference is easy to find!
3+0=3 3+2=5

Yes, that is the input parameter difference. Now the question was implying what does this apparently small difference or just this difference per move time "scheduling" yield when deployed through full games and many games (and many players).

That there might still be significant difference in behavior that can persist when looking at full deployment of the microscopic rule of time control, would mean there is something to look at. So the title is to be taken for its consequences. I even think it is part of the good presentation that the question appeared so innocent.

@The_Inverse_Tangent said in #6: > The difference is easy to find! > 3+0=3 3+2=5 Yes, that is the input parameter difference. Now the question was implying what does this apparently small difference or just this difference per move time "scheduling" yield when deployed through full games and many games (and many players). That there might still be significant difference in behavior that can persist when looking at full deployment of the microscopic rule of time control, would mean there is something to look at. So the title is to be taken for its consequences. I even think it is part of the good presentation that the question appeared so innocent.
#8

Hi oortcloud_o!

Nice post! Thanks for your work and the insights.

You have talked about the preferences of players 3+0 vs 3+2. There is an issue which I think it might be related:

3+0 Tournaments are offered every hour on arena tournaments while 3+2 are less offered.

In my case (personal opinion/personal taste), I prefer 3+2; buy I play 3+0 because I also enjoy tournaments.

Do you think Arena tournament may hide player preferences between 3+2 vs 3+0?

Thank you again for your post!
All the best

Hi oortcloud_o! Nice post! Thanks for your work and the insights. You have talked about the preferences of players 3+0 vs 3+2. There is an issue which I think it might be related: 3+0 Tournaments are offered every hour on arena tournaments while 3+2 are less offered. In my case (personal opinion/personal taste), I prefer 3+2; buy I play 3+0 because I also enjoy tournaments. Do you think Arena tournament may hide player preferences between 3+2 vs 3+0? Thank you again for your post! All the best
#9

@dboing said in #5:

I keep my analysis in Jupyter and Markdown. I don't have plans on sharing the analysis yet.

@dboing said in #5: > I keep my analysis in Jupyter and Markdown. I don't have plans on sharing the analysis yet.
#10

Nice work, very interesting to read! It would also be nice to see if there's a difference in rating gain / loss for 3+0 vs 3+2. For example, if the pool of players playing 3+0 is stronger than the 3+2 pool, and there's a player who plays both 50%, you would expect him to lose points on 3+0 and win points on 3+2.

Nice work, very interesting to read! It would also be nice to see if there's a difference in rating gain / loss for 3+0 vs 3+2. For example, if the pool of players playing 3+0 is stronger than the 3+2 pool, and there's a player who plays both 50%, you would expect him to lose points on 3+0 and win points on 3+2.