This is an archived low-energy page for bots and other anonmyous visitors.
Please sign up if you are a human and want to interact.
in reply to Re^6: Perl Golf Ethics
in thread Perl Golf Ethics
the key to actually winning was happening to know that there was a secret
It wasn't a secret to the winner. ;-) So I think justice was served there.
And who can prove that Ton's magic formula is the final word?
It's just possible someone might have invented a more magical formula than Ton and out-Ton-ed Ton. I know I tried. :-)
Update: it turns out a more magical formula was indeed available all along!
Seriously though, I agree with you that it was unfortunate that Fonality chose a problem where knowing of a previous similar golf gave a significant advantage. They didn't do it on purpose and I'm sure if they'd have known, they would have set a different problem. Having said that, I still enjoyed golfing on the non-magic-formula parts of the problem and found that to be challenging-in-the-extreme ... to the point of melting my brain at times. :-)
|
Re^8: Perl Golf Ethics
by petdance (Parson) on Jan 04, 2007 at 17:01 UTC
|
Having said that, I still enjoyed golfing on the non-magic-formula parts of the problem and found that to be challenging-in-the-extreme ... to the point of melting my brain at times. :-)
Me too, and that's why finding out that there was a magic key was so bothersome to me. I DID have fun, and I DID work on it, and to find that I started out at a distinct disadvantage from the start is the pisser.
I agree with you that it was unfortunate that fonality chose a problem where knowing of a previous similar golf gave a significant advantage.
So perhaps my concerns aren't "rubbish", eh?
| [reply] |
|
|
I DID have fun
Agree
I DID work on it
Agree again
to find that I started out at a distinct disadvantage from the start is the pisser
Now this is where we diverge. Like Jasper and `/anick, had this happened
to me, I would see the funny side of it, laugh at myself, shake my
fist in the general direction of the person one stroke ahead of me
on the leaderboard and swear to get even next time. :-)
It's only a game after all.
So perhaps my concerns aren't "rubbish", eh?
What I said "rubbish" to was your assertion that the competition
was essentially a test of knowledge of ancient romanic magical
formulae and not a test of cleverness and coding skill.
I found that claim to be insulting to all the golfers who worked
so hard and so deviously to shave off just one more stroke.
Now, if you are suggesting that, armed with Ton's magical romanic
formula, you could have somehow swept majestically past the Golfic
Emporer Tonius Hospelius to claim the $350 bounty, I will happily
walk down the main street of Chicago in my underwear, swinging a
five iron, shouting "That Lester guy is talking rubbish again!". :-)
| [reply] |
|
|
I found that claim to be insulting to all the golfers who worked so hard and so deviously to shave off just one more stroke.
That would include me, too, and I certainly don't begrudge anyone else their fruits. If anyone was insulted by that, I apologize. I just wanted a level playing field.
| [reply] |
|
|
to find that I started out at a distinct disadvantage from the start is the pisser
Luckily, this disadvantage is unlikely to have affected
your final position at all since none of the players in
your section of the leaderboard used the magic formula.
I've gone through every solution in
the top 30, noting who used the magic formula and who didn't.
Those who used it had scores of: 99, 102, 107, 111, 114, 118,
119, 122, 129, 135, 143.
For the sake of analysis, let's assume the tournament was
played with a rule that forbade the use of any magic formulas.
As Ton has already pointed out, not knowing the magic formula
costs an expert golfer no more than about five strokes.
So you might add a five stroke penalty to all those scores above.
However, not all those golfers are experts (though most are),
so let's be brutal and penalize them all by forty
strokes. Doing that pushes the worst of the scores above
up to 183, still three strokes ahead of your score.
So it seems unlikely your position in the tournament would
have changed at all had the playing field been more level.
Oh, one more minor nit, since you are so hot on level playing
fields. I noticed towards the end that you joined forces with
another competitor. Do you think it fair, or a "level playing
field", for an individual to compete against a team of two,
who are able to pool the best of each other's ideas?
| [reply] |
|
|
Luckily, this disadvantage is unlikely to have affected your final position at all since none of the players in your section of the leaderboard used the magic formula.
It's not an issue of where I ended up. I'm sorry you spent the time investigating the what-ifs.
Do you think it fair, or a "level playing field", for an individual to compete against a team of two, who are able to pool the best of each other's ideas?
Clearly, yes.
| [reply] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
