Ranked #1 in [customized salmagundi]

[RocketManJames]

So, let's say that in a given event/task/whatever you can be ranked as Nth best in the world. So, someone who is the #1 best tennis player in the world would get 1 point in Tennis. Someone who is the 458,555th best in the world would get 458,555 points.

Now, if you were allowed to customize a set of events/skills/whatever, how many different ones would you need so that you would be the best at this particular customized mix? Sum the points, and lowest number of points wins.

Anyone who is #1 at anything would automatically need only 1 event. But, someone who is very very good at something, would need to attach more events that he's pretty good at, in order to become the best at the combined set of events.

For example, say you are #100 in the world at tennis. But, you happen to be the 10,000th best chess player in the world. It is now very likely that you are #1 in the world for the [Tennis, Chess] combination.

Also, say knowledge of certain things can also be considered events. Like, someone's list of events could be [poker, backgammon, curling, speed reading while hopping on left leg to the beat music, knowledge of French Literature, hot-dog eating given 12 minutes and 22 seconds]. Maybe this particular set of events maps to (in points/rankings): [40,000; 250,000; 800,000; 10,232,230, 280,000,000, 500,000]. The total score for the set of events would be the sum. So then everyone in the world would also have some summed score for this set of events. The lowest score would designate who was #1 for this set.

How many different 'events' would you think you'd need to be #1? I would guess that most people would eventually become #1 if they were allowed to tack on more and more events. But, it's clear that some would never be able achieve #1 status no matter what combination.

I'm guessing I could maybe be #1 given 40 events... though, I have no idea what these events would be.

-RMJ

[CallMeIshmael]

I like this problem a lot.

But... a big loop hole is specification.

You could come up with one set, or AT MAX 2 sets, that would rank you #1 if you let us get picky.

[RocketManJames]

[ QUOTE ]
I like this problem a lot.

But... a big loop hole is specification.

You could come up with one set, or AT MAX 2 sets, that would rank you #1 if you let us get picky.

[/ QUOTE ]

Care to elaborate? I think that this is an interesting subject... and I thought about it quite a bit after a night out drinking.

Also, I'm not asking how many sets you could come up with that you'd be #1 at. I just want to know the minimum number of elements in a set of events that would have you ranked as #1.

-RMJ

[New001]

I think what he means is... I could be #1 at "Hopping on one foot while reciting the Magna Carta and playing poker with my eyes closed in a minefield." Which I might be. But if they're restricted to somewhat normal, doable activities, it'll take a few different things.

But this is cool, I could probably get it with roughly 6-8 of them if they're fairly normal activities.

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
Care to elaborate? I think that this is an interesting subject... and I thought about it quite a bit after a night out drinking.

Also, I'm not asking how many sets you could come up with that you'd be #1 at. I just want to know the minimum number of elements in a set of events that would have you ranked as #1.

[/ QUOTE ]

The set of:

1) Cornell University Bio Majors
2) The winrates of poker players who use an XBox gamepad to control their play.

With 99.999999999% confidence, I am #1.


EDIT: I need to say: the GPA of Cornell Bio majors, as there needs to be a ranking of some sort within the set.

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
"Hopping on one foot while reciting the Magna Carta and playing poker with my eyes closed in a minefield."

[/ QUOTE ]

Im pretty sure you were just giving an example... but, if you werent, I see no reason to conclude you are #1 ranked for that set.

[RocketManJames]

[ QUOTE ]

The set of:

1) Cornell University Bio Majors
2) The winrates of poker players who use an XBox gamepad to control their play.

With 99.999999999% confidence, I am #1.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well #1 isn't an event. And, if you were put into a contest with EVERYONE in the world, and made them all play poker with an XBox controller, I no longer think you'd be ranked that high. What about giving Phil Ivey a chance at playing poker with your controller, and see if he bests your winrate, for example. Just because no one has tried something before doesn't mean that they'd be ranked poorly. I'm assuming some Absolute Truth with respect to ranking an individual at a specific moment in time. Like, if at THIS INSTANT I was told to race a horse, I don't think I'd be the worst at it in the world despite never having been on a horse.

But, I agree that specification is the loophole. What if, as the other poster suggested, we used more "normal" events. Hot dog eating given a specific time frame would be allowed, as would long-distance running vs short-distance.

-RMJ

[New001]

You clearly haven't seen me in action, then.

But yeah, it was just an example of a highly specialized, meaningless act. Your example was better.

[mmbt0ne]

Alright, I'll give it a shot...

Paintball (speedball/airball, not scenario/rec)
Stringing a tennis racket
Longest drive

I think those 3 would certainly do it. I'm mostly worried about getting the paintball players ahead of me out since it's probably the smallest subset. I can't see many of them being able to string tennis rackets period, let alone at the rate I can. Assuming that somewhere out there someone can do that, I think I can outdrive them. I'm not a monster off the tee, but I could get 320 or so, which should be good against almost 100$ of paintball players anyway. I'm not even that strong, just tall and thin so I can get enough club head speed to do some damage assuming I actually make good contact.

[TimM]

[chess, bowling, limit hold'em]?

According to FIDE my world chess rank is 9226. But this is misleading as there must be many players better than me who do not get the chance to play in FIDE rated events.

I have no way of knowing my rank at bowling or limit hold'em. Neither will be terribly good, but how many do all three? I would also have to come out of bowling retirement to use it.

[eric5148]

My set:

Golf
Limit holdem
Shooting rubber bands (I'm not kidding, I have deadly fukin accuracy with good quality rubber bands, I have 36 confirmed eye gouges)
Standing on one leg with my eyes closed (over a minute with each leg, I did this in my trainer's office and she said I can do it longer than anyone she's ever seen)

[Subfallen]

[maintaining patience with whiny children, reciting trivia on random 2+2 posters, doing consecutive clapping fingertip pushups, having fewest friends]

Wow, this might actually do it.

On a side note, how are all your posting so f'ing cool RocketMan?

[nothumb]

This is easy, I have the highest BB/100 of any Simon's Rock College graduate. Not close.

Benefits of going to a small college. Though Saul might give me a run for it if he didn't play drunk so much.

NT

[nothumb]

[ QUOTE ]
[chess, bowling, limit hold'em]?

[/ QUOTE ]

I might give you a run here. It's been a while since I played chess much but by virtue of having studied a bit my worldwide rank has got to be good. All those illiterate, starving, non-chess playing people in the world push is closer in percentile even though I suck.

Bowling I think there's a decent chance I rape a lot of you.

Limit hold'em, again, all the donks push us close together, percentile wise, even though I know in 2+2 terms you are a way better player than I am.

I think either one of us could add a skill set to claim this bracket from the other, mine would probably be "soccer goalie"

NT

[TStoneMBD]

full ring limit holdem
drafting mirrodin block in magic the gathering

this should probably rank me somewhere between 1-15 in the world, david williams might be in this top 10 category as well, good chance hes above me.

so add in best halo 1 ctf player and that should almost certainly do it.

[TStoneMBD]

where you graduated cannot be included, otherwise everyone could fill this loophole with some bs of their own.

like best limit holdem player born in (small town) in the year 1982.

[New001]

I think you underestimate how many Magic players play good poker. I'm awful with limited though.

[nothumb]

[ QUOTE ]
where you graduated cannot be included, otherwise everyone could fill this loophole with some bs of their own.


[/ QUOTE ]

Alright.

Best limit hold'em player who is also a former Quaker of Irish descent and is the captain of a bowling team.

NT

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
[chess, bowling, limit hold'em]?

According to FIDE my world chess rank is 9226. But this is misleading as there must be many players better than me who do not get the chance to play in FIDE rated events.

I have no way of knowing my rank at bowling or limit hold'em. Neither will be terribly good, but how many do all three? I would also have to come out of bowling retirement to use it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are Curtains and kidman bowling retards?

~D

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
full ring limit holdem
drafting mirrodin block in magic the gathering

this should probably rank me somewhere between 1-15 in the world, david williams might be in this top 10 category as well, good chance hes above me.

so add in best halo 1 ctf player and that should almost certainly do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am pretty sure Paluka beats you in your subset. Brian Davis might come close also.
-James

[James282]

[full ring limit hold 'em, nhl '94 for sega genesis]


-James

[TimM]

The good thing about having chess in this for me, is that it doesnt take much to go from a rank of 10,000th to 10,000,000th, especially because of all the Russian players. Is it percentile that matters, or just adding up your ranks?

[TimM]

[ QUOTE ]
Are Curtains and kidman bowling retards?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not that I know of. Their world ranks in chess are 1285 and 7937 respectively. But if they are not bowlers that will put millions between us there.

[TStoneMBD]

youre probably right. theres a good chance im not the best in my subsets.

i change my choice to "most pathetic being on the planet"

that should do it

[threeonefour]

[chess, arithmatic, party SNG's, table tennis]

3 of the 4 are games/intellectual so i could see how a smart person who likes games could have me beat with this set. i think the key is to add a variety of events that use varying skills you possess since a good chess player is more likely to be good at arithmatic than the average individual.

[beating computers at 3 minute chess(no increment, premoved allowed by the human but not the computer), arithmatic, party SNG's, table tennis, dodgeball, the 'new' tetris (the N64 version where you make squares)]

might be a better set but might be a bit long

[nothumb]

[ QUOTE ]
Is it percentile that matters, or just adding up your ranks?

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct, if we do world rank, you own me... percentile and I think I have the edge.

If you stipulate thumbless bowlers, I start to become a juggernaut.

NT

[threeonefour]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is it percentile that matters, or just adding up your ranks?

[/ QUOTE ]
Correct, if we do world rank, you own me... percentile and I think I have the edge.

If you stipulate thumbless bowlers, I start to become a juggernaut.

NT


[/ QUOTE ]


percentile should be the same as world rank if by percentile you mean the percentile of human beings you are better than. if by percentile you mean "percentile of human beings who already compete in this event regularly you beat" then the two would be different but i don't think that is what the OP intended.

ie if you are in the top 10% then you are necessarily ranked within the the top 600 million human beings regardless of the event. you are ranked in each event relative to the same total population which is 6 billion.

[Senor Choppy]

pinball + limit holdem for me.

[z32fanatic]

My set:
Golf
Tennis
Pot Limit Omaha
Madden 2005 Xbox
Fantasy Baseball Leagues

[RocketManJames]

[ QUOTE ]
percentile should be the same as world rank if by percentile you mean the percentile of human beings you are better than. if by percentile you mean "percentile of human beings who already compete in this event regularly you beat" then the two would be different but i don't think that is what the OP intended.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, percentile would be equivalent to world ranking... I definitely did not mean world ranking to be related to any formal world rank. As I said earlier, even though I've never been on a horse before, I do not believe I'd be ranked at 5 billion for horse racing.

Also, I think that most people who think that a set consisting of only 3 or 4 'competitive events' are likely fooling themselves. But, I could be very wrong.

Take someone who is GREAT at 1 event and VERY GOOD at 2 others... say his world ranks are 1000 = GREAT, 100,000 = VERY GOOD, and 199,000 = VERY GOOD. Now his total score = 300,000.

If someone is VERY GOOD at the same 3, but happens to have world ranks equal to 90,000 for all of them, he's AHEAD of the other guy. Now consider if you had a guy that was 199,000th in tennis and 100,000th in tennis... how different are their games to a casual observer (or to themselves)? I think that this question is a variant of an optimization problem that's interesting.

There are all these trade-offs to consider as you add events to your set.

As I read more responses, maybe my guess of 40 events was way too conservative. But, I would be very surprised if the true number for a minimal set where I'm #1 is 10 or less. The world is a really big place, there are BILLIONS of people.

-RMJ

[Jack of Arcades]

FFX Chocobo Racing.

[Macdaddy Warsaw]

[ QUOTE ]
pinball + limit holdem for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

You'd have to be amazing at both. I get replays and high scores like woah.

Extra balls ain't no thang.

[RocketManJames]

[ QUOTE ]
pinball + limit holdem for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

You must be nearly world-class at one of the two... or you're a notch below world-class on both.

If you are, wow. That's great. But, if you aren't, then I'd be very surprised that you'd be #1 in the world for the combination above. But, I don't know you, so maybe it's the truth that you're #1.

-RMJ

[daryn]

[rubik's cube, racquetball, drums]

[threeonefour]

[beating computers at 3 minute chess(no increment, premoved allowed by the human but not the computer, no opening book except computer must play 1.d4 as white), party SNG's, table tennis]


actually i am pretty sure this put me in the top ten in the world easily.

when i was on my 3 0 computer chess kick I had about 40% records against a couple 2800 rated computers on some of the chess servers around the net... i am not that good at chess (maybe 1800ish USCF) but i am pretty good with anti computer methods, it usually takes me about 20 games with each color to find a good system that works and if the program has a weakness i can have every major opening system figured out within 300 games.... the problem is that in this event the bottom 5.5billion+ humans all tie for last place which is a higher number than normal (since there is no way in hell the average joe with ever draw a decent computer in a match like this)

a lot of chess players might not believe a 1800 player could beat a machine at 3 0 chess that is capable of beating grandmasters but the key is that there are a lot of way to win without checkmating... often times i can just lock up the board and shuffle pieces until the computer runs out of time or there is a draw.


EDIT: upon reading rocketman's most recent posts... i think he is right, i need a few more events before i could really conclude i am at the top since i figure i am only in the top 1% at pingpong so that means i would need to be around the top 100 at [chess, party sngs]...

[Senor Choppy]

I'm no where near world-class at pinball, but I'm guessing I'm light years ahead of most people ranked higher than me in poker.

limit holdem + juggling + pinball + tennis would be a set i'd be confident enough in to bet on, and only because so few people have taken the time to learn how to juggle, which is remarkably easy to become competent at.

it seems pretty easy to get near the top just using poker and something random, but being at the very top might take a lot more skills than people realize.

[PokerFink]

I just want to be a douche for a second here and point out that many of you are computing this wrong.

A lot of you are saying "I would be close in [x,y] so if you throw in [z] I would definitely be number 1." The problem is that when you throw in z, you aren't just competing against those ranked above you in [x, y]. You are competing against everyone.

For example, lets say you are #4 in the world in [x, y]. So you throw in z. Now you are better at z than those ranked #1-3 in [x, y]. But since you are only #94,405 in the world at z, it destroys your overall ranking for [x, y, z]. So even though you jumped ahead of those who outranked you in [x, y], you are not anywhere close to #1 in [x, y, z].

Also, you cannot use any sort of qualification that eliminates people, such as home town, age or college major.

[/ me being a douche]

Edited to point out that Rocket already said this, sort of.

[JackWilson]

[ QUOTE ]
full ring limit holdem
drafting mirrodin block in magic the gathering

this should probably rank me somewhere between 1-15 in the world, david williams might be in this top 10 category as well, good chance hes above me.

so add in best halo 1 ctf player and that should almost certainly do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd definitely take you on in the MD5 draft / Limit Hold'em set. I still played heavily in Mirrodin block and it was my best draft format ever. I really knew that format incredibly well. Limit hold'em also happens to be my best poker game. BTW, how good were you at Magic? Any high Pro Tour finishes?

EDIT:
Quake 3 Arena 1v1 Deathmatch
Magic the Gathering (Grudge match constructed format)
Limit Hold'em
Tennis

I think this combination might just be a winner for me. See, I'm not very good at Tennis, but that's ok because very few people who are good at Tennis would be any good at the other 3. In the other 3 I am all in the top 1% easily. I'd say I'm in the top 0.05% for both Magic and Quake 3.

[Yeti]

QuakeWorld FFA
6max NL

I think that should do it. Depends how good Lakerman is at NL, though.

[JackWilson]

[ QUOTE ]
QuakeWorld FFA
6max NL

I think that should do it. Depends how good Lakerman is at NL, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually kinda doubt this. LakermaN is almost certainly a LOT better than you at Quake and it would be hard for your skill at 6max NL to make up for since LakermaN also plays semi-pro online poker.

[LaggyLou]

You are absolutely correct. People are waaaaaaaaaaaaay underestimating how difficult it is to be the best in the ENTIRE WORLD at a given set of activities.

[PokerFink]

I'm not sure what my skillset would be, but it would undoubtedly include making three-pointers on my mini-basketball hoop in my basement. I have years of experience, the rest of the world has a combined zero experience. You could probably find people who are better (just by freak chance), but not many.

So maybe [making 3 pointers in my basement, knowledge of the Philadelphia Eagles from 2001-2004]. That should legitametly put me close.

[Yeti]

[ QUOTE ]
I actually kinda doubt this. LakermaN is almost certainly a LOT better than you at Quake and it would be hard for your skill at 6max NL to make up for since LakermaN also plays semi-pro online poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

/me shrugs

he's obviously better than me by a mile at duels, but the difference will be a lot smaller in ffa.

just because he plays high stakes limit doesn't mean he's necessarily that great at nl.

edit - although i do see your point. i'm not sure tacking on lots of events is the way to go about this, i'm pretty sure just a couple of specifics is better.

[Yeti]

Ok, my revised list :

QW FFA - ztndm6
6 max NL
NBA Live 95 on the Megadrive

I'm almost certain that i'd be the best in this set.

[Superfluous Man]

My list:

quizbowl
'stars SNGs
GPA
Getting my ass beat on Jeopardy

Holy fuck that's a nerdy list. But putting other, less nerdy stuff I'm good at wouldn't eliminate enough people.

[Towelie]

Gettin high, drying off, and playing songs on keypads.












































You wanna get high?

[LaggyLou]

[ QUOTE ]
[making 3 pointers in my basement, knowledge of the Philadelphia Eagles from 2001-2004]

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that, even not having ever seen your basement, Donovan McNabb is better than you at this combination of skills.

[PokerFink]

There is no way. The ceiling in my basement is really low, so anyone over about 6 feet has a really, really hard time. This is a proven fact.

Interesting suggestion though.

[EliteNinja]

Roger Federer is #1 and he's staying there for quite a while.

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure what my skillset would be, but it would undoubtedly include making three-pointers on my mini-basketball hoop in my basement. I have years of experience, the rest of the world has a combined zero experience. You could probably find people who are better (just by freak chance), but not many.

So maybe [making 3 pointers in my basement, knowledge of the Philadelphia Eagles from 2001-2004]. That should legitametly put me close.

[/ QUOTE ]

You'd be in tough shape. My buddy named every single player on the Eagles from 2000 to date the night before the NFC championship with relative ease, and also happens to be a phenomenal athlete(D-1 scholarship for football, varsity basketball and baseball in high school).
-James

[Klepton]

first i would like to say this is an amazing idea

[short handed limit hold em, knowing anything and everything from the tv show LOST, freecell, talking so fast my words slur]

[PokerFink]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure what my skillset would be, but it would undoubtedly include making three-pointers on my mini-basketball hoop in my basement. I have years of experience, the rest of the world has a combined zero experience. You could probably find people who are better (just by freak chance), but not many.

So maybe [making 3 pointers in my basement, knowledge of the Philadelphia Eagles from 2001-2004]. That should legitametly put me close.

[/ QUOTE ]

You'd be in tough shape. My buddy named every single player on the Eagles from 2000 to date the night before the NFC championship with relative ease, and also happens to be a phenomenal athlete(D-1 scholarship for football, varsity basketball and baseball in high school).
-James

[/ QUOTE ]

You guys are underestimating playing mini-basketball in my basement. The ceiling is very low, the basket is crooked, the ball is large (doesn't fit in the basket easily), and you can't bank it in. Plus, as I said, you're screwed if you're tall, which I'm guessing your friend is if he played varsity basketball.

And assuming he is naming players who were on the active roster, I could probably name just about all of them, and most of their numbers.

[CallMeIshmael]

Didnt see your reply until today (odd note: I corrected my post (saying I needed to rank the GPAs) independently and at exactly the same time as you)

I have a problem with this...

[ QUOTE ]
And, if you were put into a contest with EVERYONE in the world, and made them all play poker with an XBox controller, I no longer think you'd be ranked that high. What about giving Phil Ivey a chance at playing poker with your controller, and see if he bests your winrate, for example. Just because no one has tried something before doesn't mean that they'd be ranked poorly.

[/ QUOTE ]

This presents a much larger loophole, IMO.

For example... lets take tennis.

Roger Federer is the current world #1, right? That means, on average, anyone who steps on a tennis court with RF is going to lose more often than they win.

BUT... that is VERY DIFFERENT than saying he is the most adept at tennis.

There is a VERY VERY GOOD chance that the best tennis player in the world today doesnt play tennis.

This kind of goes back to nature vs nurture.

Federer has both the genetic capability (nature) and proper environment (nurture... that is, he was given a tennis racquet and encouraged to develop his ability in tennis) to become the world #1.

I mean... if, hypothetically, roger federer broke his neck in an accident when he was 6, and never played, does that make andy roddick (or whomever is #2 right now) the best tennis player in the world?

There is a very good chance that there exists someone who is more genetically gifted to be a tennis player, but was simply never handed a raquet.


So.... you cant say, hand Phil Ivey an Xbox controller and compare winrates. Because, you are saying to me: there exists someone who is better than you at that skill (poker with gamepad), but he just hasnt gotten used to it. Because, if you say that, then you have to give everyone in the world the same shot (including preperation time)... and if this is the case, I doubt that any list in this thread is even close to accurate.

[Sponger15SB]

[mario tennis, any other activity]

/images/graemlins/grin.gif


seriously though

[bodyboarding, hold em]

[New001]

The best tennis player in the world has to be actually playing tennis. The difference between that and the Xbox controller example is that you're still playing poker. As long as he is a better poker player than you, he should be able to adapt to using the controller. Him playing poker online with a mouse and you playing poker online with an Xbox controller means you're both still playing poker. You've just chosen to play through a different device.

Think of it this way: If I was the #1 tennis player and I played right handed, and you were the #2 tennis player in the world and you played left handed, there's still no question that I'm #1 and you're #2. You could say you're the best left handed player, but you're still the second best tennis player. By specificying it more to left handed and right handed, it seems like it's similar to playing with a mouse versus a controller.

Make sense? It's a little hard to come up with a good example.

[beckham9]

[ QUOTE ]
I think what he means is... I could be #1 at "Hopping on one foot while reciting the Magna Carta and playing poker with my eyes closed in a minefield." Which I might be. But if they're restricted to somewhat normal, doable activities, it'll take a few different things.

But this is cool, I could probably get it with roughly 6-8 of them if they're fairly normal activities.

[/ QUOTE ]

ha list them then

[beckham9]

[ QUOTE ]

Standing on one leg with my eyes closed (over a minute with each leg, I did this in my trainer's office and she said I can do it longer than anyone she's ever seen)

[/ QUOTE ]

is this that hard, i would bet i could beat that right now. will try and get back in 1 min 30 sec

[beckham9]

so easy to stand on one foot with eyes closed

[tbach24]

Wiffle ball, Madden 2001, 2003-2005, MVP Baseball 2005, fantasy baseball and football.

[Clarkmeister]

Online Warlords 3: Darklords Rising. In that group of players I was acknowledged to be one of the 3 best known players in the world. So my subset could easily be just one criteria. Add a filter of limit holdem and I am without a doubt #1.

[beckham9]

[ QUOTE ]
Online Warlords 3: Darklords Rising. In that group of players I was acknowledged to be one of the 3 best known players in the world. So my subset could easily be just one criteria. Add a filter of limit holdem and I am without a doubt #1.

[/ QUOTE ]

i would say that many peoipl on this board played that game and the strategy was not that advanced, and that many people on this board would be at around the same level (top 50 or 100 etc)

[CallMeIshmael]

I knew somebody was going to bring this up.

2 points:

1) In counter to your LH tennis player. Well, what about doubles players? The best doubles tennis player is different than the best singles player right? Are they in different categories for this thread? I would assume they would be.

But...that's essentially the same thing as the best left handed player. I mean, the only difference is that humans opt to not have different contests for left handed and right handed singles players, doesnt mean they arent different skills. I dont know if you play tennis, but LH vs RH matters on serve, because of the angles at which the ball travels.

If someone were to say "I am the best left handed pitcher" is that OK? I would think yes, because LHP vs RHP "matters" in our world.

But this contest isnt about what "matters". As many of the other categories are very odd choices.

This is a really hard point to explain. And I didnt do a great job of it.


2) I still disagree with the Phil Ivey thing. You are biasing your opinion towards that which has a much slower learning curve.

If I were to hand him the controller, and say "play" I guarentee he would time out for his first 5 hands, because he would not know the controls. He would have no idea what the hell to do, but, then, would eventually figure them out, and whoop my ass.

BUT... that doesnt mean my winrate is not higher than his for those first five hands, now does it?

Just because it would only take him 10 minutes to learn to be better than me at this skill (poker + xbox) doesnt mean that, at this point (BEFORE he has learned to use the controller) that I am not better than him.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Online Warlords 3: Darklords Rising. In that group of players I was acknowledged to be one of the 3 best known players in the world. So my subset could easily be just one criteria. Add a filter of limit holdem and I am without a doubt #1.

[/ QUOTE ]

i would say that many peoipl on this board played that game and the strategy was not that advanced, and that many people on this board would be at around the same level (top 50 or 100 etc)

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd wager *any* amount up to $10k that I'd beat anyone I haven't played against on this board in the game online, best of 7, alternate hosting. I'd also be shocked if there were any players here in the top 100 other than two I know of. At the very least I'd recognize their handles.

Like almost all computer games, the difference in skill between playing against friends and prolonged online competition is immense.

[threeonefour]

[ QUOTE ]

I'd wager *any* amount up to $10k that I'd beat anyone I haven't played against on this board in the game online, best of 7, alternate hosting. I'd also be shocked if there were any players here in the top 100 other than two I know of. At the very least I'd recognize their handles.

Like almost all computer games, the difference in skill between playing against friends and prolonged online competition is immense.

[/ QUOTE ]

the problem is that you can still easily lose your overall competition


ie. lets say you are 4000 in the world at limit holdem (i know you are good i am not exactly sure if that number is way too high or low or whatever) and 3rd in the world at the video game.

your event total is 4003. there could easily be a top 100 limit holdem player who is also in the top 3500 at playing that video game and that guy would win the {video game, holdem} competition

[New001]

Doubles tennis is as different from normal tennis as NL is different from limit. It's the same game, but it's got slightly different rules and different skills are needed to be the best. Obviously a lot of it transfers, but the two best singles tennis players together probably wouldn't come close to beating the best doubles teams.

Best LH tennis player would be like best pitcher under 150 pounds, or best basketball player under 6' tall. And if those work, why not say someone is the best right-handed, 140lb, 5'8" pitcher? His build determines the way he can pitch, in addition to other things. It's obviously a fine line, but I think it matters.

[(small stakes) limit hold 'em, hardcore Diablo II, constructed Magic, Achaea combat] wouldn't get me #1, but it should be fairly respectable. I don't know what to add to bump it up any higher.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'd wager *any* amount up to $10k that I'd beat anyone I haven't played against on this board in the game online, best of 7, alternate hosting. I'd also be shocked if there were any players here in the top 100 other than two I know of. At the very least I'd recognize their handles.

Like almost all computer games, the difference in skill between playing against friends and prolonged online competition is immense.

[/ QUOTE ]

the problem is that you can still easily lose your overall competition


ie. lets say you are 4000 in the world at limit holdem (i know you are good i am not exactly sure if that number is way too high or low or whatever) and 3rd in the world at the video game.

your event total is 4003. there could easily be a top 100 limit holdem player who is also in the top 3500 at playing that video game and that guy would win the {video game, holdem} competition

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough, thank goodness for my backup plan that whoever is Lord of the Rankings could easily rank me #1 in the Warlords category, making the rest meaningless. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[lordfoo]

speedcubing (solving a Rubik's Cube quickly)
table tennis
bughouse (siamese chess)
PLO
boresighting laser rangefinders

[Paluka]

[ QUOTE ]
full ring limit holdem
drafting mirrodin block in magic the gathering

this should probably rank me somewhere between 1-15 in the world, david williams might be in this top 10 category as well, good chance hes above me.


[/ QUOTE ]

We could set this up quite easily. 8 man limit holdem table, and some 8 man drafting. The 8 people shold probably be myself, Billy Jensen, Brock Parker, Eric Kesselman, Jon Finkel, Gabriel Nassif, and I guess I'd have to think of others. TStoneMBD's claim to be in the topo 15 is absolutely absurd.

[JackWilson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
full ring limit holdem
drafting mirrodin block in magic the gathering

this should probably rank me somewhere between 1-15 in the world, david williams might be in this top 10 category as well, good chance hes above me.


[/ QUOTE ]

We could set this up quite easily. 8 man limit holdem table, and some 8 man drafting. The 8 people shold probably be myself, Billy Jensen, Brock Parker, Eric Kesselman, Jon Finkel, Gabriel Nassif, and I guess I'd have to think of others. TStoneMBD's claim to be in the topo 15 is absolutely absurd.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is Jon's poker anywhere near as sharp as his Magic? I didn't know he played. And Nassif??

[DougOzzzz]

Because of the relative obscurity of each of these games, there is a decent chance (>40% I would say) that I rank #1 in the world in this combination:

1) Progressive Chess (White makes 1 move, black makes 2, white makes 3, black makes 4, etc.)
2) Minesweeper

To further increase the odds of me being #1, then change minesweeper to:

Minesweeper, using only the left-click button on the mouse (or the right click button for "lefty" mouses"). i.e., no flagging.

My total should be below 300, but I could be way off if I am underestimating the # of complete freaks who can beat me at these with no training.

[Clarkmeister]

BTW, we might as well change this to "what are you better at than any other pro poker player?" Almost everyone should be able to do this in 2 things, 3 tops.

[Roan]

[ QUOTE ]
Wiffle ball, Madden 2001, 2003-2005, MVP Baseball 2005, fantasy baseball and football.

[/ QUOTE ]

what happened in 2002?

[tbach24]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wiffle ball, Madden 2001, 2003-2005, MVP Baseball 2005, fantasy baseball and football.

[/ QUOTE ]

what happened in 2002?

[/ QUOTE ]

IIRC, it was too defensively oriented. It also broke within 2 weeks of me getting it /images/graemlins/frown.gif Never got good at it.

Edit- the odd part about this is that my gameplan in 2005 revolves around defense and running. If you can control the clock, I guarantee you will win a large majority of victories. And I don't mean being a playclock freak, but eating the time with running, solid defense and lots of short passes.

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
[mario tennis, any other activity]

/images/graemlins/grin.gif


seriously though

[bodyboarding, hold em]

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, apparently I didn't understand the whole concept....

so, the new one is...

{ Bodyboarding, Mario Tennis 64 - Singles, on clay and no stars }

[elwoodblues]

Doing legal research on Westlaw
Tetris on the NES for lines (not score)
Picking random numbers

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
Picking random numbers

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh.... I am just as good at this as you.

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Picking random numbers

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh.... I am just as good at this as you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im pretty sure that was the joke.

[elwoodblues]

Not in combination with the other two things you're not.

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Picking random numbers

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh.... I am just as good at this as you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im pretty sure that was the joke.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I'm glad I didn't put "detecting sarcasm" as one of my sets

[DougOzzzz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Picking random numbers

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh.... I am just as good at this as you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your numbers are probably not as random as you think. I've found that some computer programming languages to do a poor job of selecting random numbers, I doubt you'd be anywhere near as good as them.

[GoblinMason (Craig)]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
full ring limit holdem
drafting mirrodin block in magic the gathering

this should probably rank me somewhere between 1-15 in the world, david williams might be in this top 10 category as well, good chance hes above me.


[/ QUOTE ]

We could set this up quite easily. 8 man limit holdem table, and some 8 man drafting. The 8 people shold probably be myself, Billy Jensen, Brock Parker, Eric Kesselman, Jon Finkel, Gabriel Nassif, and I guess I'd have to think of others. TStoneMBD's claim to be in the topo 15 is absolutely absurd.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I saw TStone's quoted post, I was 99% sure that the poster was going to be StacysMom. He's a self-proclaimed MD5 pro although I doubt he's up to Paluka's or William's standards.

-Craig

[AlphaWice]

three:

[1v1 UMS Basketball Map to 15 no curve mode in Starcraft, Math contests, NLHE Freezeout Turbo]