Who are the bad SE p0sters? DRAFT
04-24-2013
, 11:38 PM
Besides trainwreckog and AngerPush who are the bad SE posters?
[x] petulant child
[x] Delusional Falcons fan who seems to have the sports knowledge of Skip Bayless
[x] Elite thread creator
[x] Thinks he's smart
Lest you think this is all from only one discussion, this is over 10!!! threads in his posting lifetime
First the non-bad posters thread
Not only that he bad posts in the bad posting thread, only the truly WOAT can claim this.
Here's some sampling of his defense of himself in the bad posters thread using IQ:
And here comes the meltdown...
But lest you think he got better...
lolnope.gif
No, you just need to not suck giant donkey dong bro
Yes, it is. However you make it a little bit less unique day by day.
We've noticed bro
No, we're all sorry you suck. Very, very sorry.
[x] petulant child
[x] Thinks he's smart
Lest you think this is all from only one discussion, this is over 10!!! threads in his posting lifetime
First the non-bad posters thread
Here's some sampling of his defense of himself in the bad posters thread using IQ:
Quote:
It is without a doubt at least 15 points higher than the average SE poster. It's not even close.
Will do a prop bet at even odds up to $1,000 lol
Take 5 SE posters of perceived various intelligence (don't take the five smartest guys), test them, test me, and you will see. There is a reason why guys like Iggy and I have trouble communicating with people of average intelligence.
Will do a prop bet at even odds up to $1,000 lol
Take 5 SE posters of perceived various intelligence (don't take the five smartest guys), test them, test me, and you will see. There is a reason why guys like Iggy and I have trouble communicating with people of average intelligence.
Quote:
Quote:
It is without a doubt at least 15 points higher than the average SE poster. It's not even close.
Will do a prop bet at even odds up to $1,000 lol
Take 5 SE posters of perceived various intelligence (don't take the five smartest guys), test them, test me, and you will see. There is a reason why guys like Iggy and I have trouble communicating with people of average intelligence.
Will do a prop bet at even odds up to $1,000 lol
Take 5 SE posters of perceived various intelligence (don't take the five smartest guys), test them, test me, and you will see. There is a reason why guys like Iggy and I have trouble communicating with people of average intelligence.
Quote:
Wow hilarious that I get ragged on for talking IQ and then this thread blows up with everyone bragging about their high IQs. Some quality irony there. Love it. Also love how no one is actually specific about their SAT/GRE/GMAT scores except the tool saying he got a "1409" hahaha
Quote:
Don't think I do. Did the post about me just having fun go unnoticed? I'm just as stupid, lonely and pathetic as the rest of you losers. I have severe autism, a very average IQ, a poor sense of humor, offends easily. I have almost no redeeming qualities at all. I'm at the lowest end of the totem pole. I can't even make friends in a sporting subforum of a poker website. Two things that I love that have loved me back. Yet here I am alone begging for friends. Ppl like schu and PVN somehow make friends and get ppl to like them yet I have no idea how. It just seems so impossible. In my 3+ years I have had many different strategies to obtain companionship. That's all I want. Is just to have a bit of fun on the Internet with supposedly other losers like me that have nothing else to do than talk Bull**** about sports like we have this incredible sense of superiority. Like most people on this forum delude themselves into thinking they could successfully coach an NFL team or something. Yet as pathetic as many of the posters here are, I seem to be the least liked out of everyone and that makes me so incredibly sad. I can't do anything right 
Quote:
I've given this post a lot of thought, and gone back and forth about whether I should even try to attempt penance, but I figure what the hell, give it a shot.
I know I've been a pretty awful poster way too often in SE. I am posting this to ask for some sort of official reprieve in people's minds, and be given a "clean slate" if you will. If you guys will allow it, I'd like a chance to start over, and for everyone to give me another shot at becoming at least an OK poster.
I understand most of my shortcomings and realize that I need to improve in many ways. Help me to do that. I need to not go on ridiculous angry tirades, limit the smug personal attacks, not get offended at every little thing, and overall chill with the emotional meltdowns.
What say everyone just giving me a second shot at this? From this point on, I hope I can operate on the assumption that when people see a post by "AngerPush" they won't have their preconceived thought that the post must be terrible. Maybe just maybe, those posts will be better. I hope I didn't just make things worse and realize that it's very hard to change opinions that have been constructed over 3+ years of posting.
Thank you all for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
the new and improved,
AngerPush
I know I've been a pretty awful poster way too often in SE. I am posting this to ask for some sort of official reprieve in people's minds, and be given a "clean slate" if you will. If you guys will allow it, I'd like a chance to start over, and for everyone to give me another shot at becoming at least an OK poster.
I understand most of my shortcomings and realize that I need to improve in many ways. Help me to do that. I need to not go on ridiculous angry tirades, limit the smug personal attacks, not get offended at every little thing, and overall chill with the emotional meltdowns.
What say everyone just giving me a second shot at this? From this point on, I hope I can operate on the assumption that when people see a post by "AngerPush" they won't have their preconceived thought that the post must be terrible. Maybe just maybe, those posts will be better. I hope I didn't just make things worse and realize that it's very hard to change opinions that have been constructed over 3+ years of posting.
Thank you all for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
the new and improved,
AngerPush
lolnope.gif
Yes, it is. However you make it a little bit less unique day by day.
We've noticed bro
No, we're all sorry you suck. Very, very sorry.
04-24-2013
, 11:38 PM
04-24-2013
, 11:40 PM
"You either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain"
It's rare thing for someone to be so impactful with less than 400 posts but here we are.
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/5648129/odelllllllllll
ODELLLLLLLLL definitely died a hero and was able to get a World Series thread named in his honor.
ODELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL will provide in depth analytical thinking which will mesh nicely with the omnipotent CINCH.
He will also be providing the internet tough guy, a key requisite for any forum.
Teaming with CINCH these two will also provide a kickass nba scouting department.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/46...69/?highlight=
ODELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
It's rare thing for someone to be so impactful with less than 400 posts but here we are.
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/5648129/odelllllllllll
Spoiler:
Quote:
one month for losing a bet for same and then completely losing his mind and calling everyone nerds who live in their moms' basement (accurate but still over the line)
Quote:
the time had come, sadly (UPDATE: unbanned by popular demand! Surely a mistake though.)
Quote:
Every single one of you dorks are total pussies and like dick....you know nothing about sports except for what you read on your nerd websites.....running good in sports, that's a laugh.....you guys are such losers its not even funny, actually pretty sad.......if you guys were actually athletic you could be taken seriously but all you do is look at stupid numbers that dont mean anything and believe in your mind that you're smart
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/46...69/?highlight=
ODELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
04-24-2013
, 11:51 PM
04-24-2013
, 11:55 PM
Odell is a great pick
You quoted the post of his best moment, but you really need the context behind it to really appreciate it.
It starts with KBFC making a great post in a random NBA thread:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/46...l#post15320306
You quoted the post of his best moment, but you really need the context behind it to really appreciate it.
It starts with KBFC making a great post in a random NBA thread:
Quote:
You got the right idea, but there are a few problems with your approach:
- AI does not get 3 steals per 10 possessions. He gets about 2.5 per GAME, which for him is about 75 possessions. Obviously he doesn't gamble on every single possession, but his success rate is probably closer to 2.5/75 than 3/10, a factor of 10 difference.
- His 2.5 steals/75 is an absolute measurement. The average PG/SG is going to get about 1.5 steals/75 possessions, so AI is only picking up one extra marginal steal per game over the league average, which I think it's fair to assume is less aggressive and gamble-y (although still obviously some >0 amount of aggro/gamble) than AI.
- When AI gets a steal, it is not a guaranteed layup. In fact, the resulting possession is worth about 1.2-1.3 points on average, which is "only" two-tenths of a point better than an average possession. As someone mentioned, the result of this is that each successful steal is worth somewhere around 1 point on defense and 0.2 on offense ~= 1.2pts total. So given that AI's successful steals are only worth about 1.2 points per game over the average player, he needs to make sure his gambling doesn't cost the team more than 1.2 points over the remaining 72 defensive possessions in order to simply break even.
So let's rewrite your #2:
2. Gamble for steals
9.7x he does not steal, defense is compromised and allows X-1.05 marginal points, where X is the value of the compromised possession, and 1.05 is about the league average possession value. Cost = 9.7*(X-1.05)
0.3x he does steal, defensive value of 0-1.05 = -1.05 points. Resulting offensive possession value of about 1.25-1.05 = +0.2 points. Overall gain = 0.3*(1.25) = 0.4 points.
So the BE equation is 9.7*(X-1.05) = 0.4.
X = (9.7*1.05+0.4)/9.7 = 1.09 points per possession.
So given those numbers, if his failed gambles improve the opponents eFG% by more than about 2%, then the overall value of the steals is negative.
Using your original 30% success rate:
7*(X-1.05) = 3*(1.25)
X = (7*1.05+3.75)/7 = 1.59 points per possession = 27% eFG increase.
Here's the graph for B.E. values of failed-steal defensive possessions vs steal success %:
Using your original estimate of 10 points/7 possessions =1.42 pts/poss when he fails on a gamble, you can see on the graph that he needs to be successful 23% of the time to break even.
Anyway, I'm not going to discuss what the exact inputs should be, and what AI's defensive value actually is. Just thought I'd chime in with a little methodology help.
- AI does not get 3 steals per 10 possessions. He gets about 2.5 per GAME, which for him is about 75 possessions. Obviously he doesn't gamble on every single possession, but his success rate is probably closer to 2.5/75 than 3/10, a factor of 10 difference.
- His 2.5 steals/75 is an absolute measurement. The average PG/SG is going to get about 1.5 steals/75 possessions, so AI is only picking up one extra marginal steal per game over the league average, which I think it's fair to assume is less aggressive and gamble-y (although still obviously some >0 amount of aggro/gamble) than AI.
- When AI gets a steal, it is not a guaranteed layup. In fact, the resulting possession is worth about 1.2-1.3 points on average, which is "only" two-tenths of a point better than an average possession. As someone mentioned, the result of this is that each successful steal is worth somewhere around 1 point on defense and 0.2 on offense ~= 1.2pts total. So given that AI's successful steals are only worth about 1.2 points per game over the average player, he needs to make sure his gambling doesn't cost the team more than 1.2 points over the remaining 72 defensive possessions in order to simply break even.
So let's rewrite your #2:
2. Gamble for steals
9.7x he does not steal, defense is compromised and allows X-1.05 marginal points, where X is the value of the compromised possession, and 1.05 is about the league average possession value. Cost = 9.7*(X-1.05)
0.3x he does steal, defensive value of 0-1.05 = -1.05 points. Resulting offensive possession value of about 1.25-1.05 = +0.2 points. Overall gain = 0.3*(1.25) = 0.4 points.
So the BE equation is 9.7*(X-1.05) = 0.4.
X = (9.7*1.05+0.4)/9.7 = 1.09 points per possession.
So given those numbers, if his failed gambles improve the opponents eFG% by more than about 2%, then the overall value of the steals is negative.
Using your original 30% success rate:
7*(X-1.05) = 3*(1.25)
X = (7*1.05+3.75)/7 = 1.59 points per possession = 27% eFG increase.
Here's the graph for B.E. values of failed-steal defensive possessions vs steal success %:
Using your original estimate of 10 points/7 possessions =1.42 pts/poss when he fails on a gamble, you can see on the graph that he needs to be successful 23% of the time to break even.
Anyway, I'm not going to discuss what the exact inputs should be, and what AI's defensive value actually is. Just thought I'd chime in with a little methodology help.
