Overclock.net › Forums › Overclockers Care › Overclock.net Folding@Home Team › Chimp Challenge 2012??
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Chimp Challenge 2012?? - Page 3

post #21 of 314
pain in the arse?
I don't want to go down this road...

the fact is there was NO MOVEMENT IN THE CC FORUMS... don't blame me...don't blame your captain either

so you think two winners is bad.... we could have had more
we could have went with OCAU recommendations with multiple categories and had 5 different winners (even for last place)

the fact is the CC forums talks weren't workin - with only 4 teams in and only 2 talking mainly (at least your captain stepped up and was present and workin for ya)
Id give your captain a pat on the back for their effort

your own team captain offer two proposal(to a vote - one was an evga one) that fell flat on their faces with a deadline (that came and went)
with only 8 teams left in CC (from last year - MPC out for gordon) and only 4 present in the forums
both EVGA and OCN did our best - we were on a lot - two other teams came on once in awhile - but with each one favoring their own proposals what do you expect

EVGA tried different formats - formula,tweaks of formula...but when you get no feedback or no compromise between anyone else - let alone agreement
Well....you wonder why nothing came of it...

as a last ditch effort I went to the teams forums directly to see what could be done
this is where I talked to Adak and he created a new format

this is a compromise...I didn't create it... there was similar talk in other team forums with such a format - it was common ground as far as EVGA was concerned

EVGA had their own deadline for being in - we are already past it - we stayed in because we had movement finally on something...

proposed by one of the original teams in the CC and one of the most senior folders in the CC and folding in general
I thank Adak for his time - he's the one that help moved the logjam


if you have to blame someone - blame the CC forums and the lack of input from the other teams

hell - I still haven't got hold of TPU yet - yet they have a 2012 CC thread and were never on the CC forums
Ive posted to TPU, and PM'd their Capts

the CC is suppose to bring teams together - to talk get to know each other, build bridges. have fun.

All I see is lack involvement in the process from some teams

if it means we start talking more often to each other - so be it. then we should start visiting each others forums and sending care packages to each other
lets talk - lets have more types of contests - or even join EVGA's contests for short races

Bosun(TSC) did that to us this year visited our forums and sent a care package - we sent one back
this is what is needed to get people together on the right track

I don't want to see us all engaged in behavior that shuns and drives teams and people away ...
Edited by Xavier Zepherious - 4/12/12 at 10:29am
post #22 of 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xavier Zepherious View Post

pain in the arse?
I don't want to go down this road...

the fact is there was NO MOVEMENT IN THE CC FORUMS... don't blame me...don't blame your captain either

so you think two winners is bad.... we could have had more
we could have went with OCAU recommendations with multiple categories and had 5 different winners (even for last place)

the fact is the CC forums talks weren't workin - with only 4 teams in and only 2 talking mainly (at least your captain stepped up and was present and workin for ya)
Id give your captain a pat on the back for their effort

*SNIPPED TO SAVE SPACE*

hell - I still haven't got hold of TPU yet - yet they have a 2012 CC thread and were never on the CC forums
Ive posted to TPU, and PM'd their Capts

the CC is suppose to bring teams together - to talk get to know each other, build bridges. have fun.

All I see is lack involvement in the process from some teams

if it means we start talking more often to each other - so be it. then we should start visiting each others forums and sending care packages to each other
lets talk - lets have more types of contests - or even join EVGA's contests for short races

Bosun(TSC) did that to us this year visited our forums and sent a care package - we sent one back
this is what is needed to get people together on the right track

I don't want to see us all engaged in behavior that shuns and drives teams and people away ...



I agree. If some calculated handicaps make the race more enjoyable for everyone, then so be it. What would the point of some of the smaller teams joining if they knew before hand that they didn't have a chance? I'm guessing that once the specs are figured out, most of us won't even notice/care about the handicap. We're in it for the good times had by all. We need to get excited for this! I enjoyed myself tremendously last year (even though people said it was almost a failure?), so I'm hoping for it to go equal or better this time. Thanks to everyone putting this together!

Also, I'd like to emphasize the bolded quoted above. ^^
Big Blue
(15 items)
 
HTPC
(13 items)
 
Bedroom HTPC
(6 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i5 2500k ASUS P8Z68-V PRO/GEN3 Diamond 6950 EVGA GTX 275 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
8 gigs G.SKILL Sniper (2x 4) Corsair 128GB SSD LG BluRay Corsair H60 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Pro 64 bit ASUS 21" & LG 20" Razer Lycosa SeaSonic X750 Gold 750W 
CaseMouse
Silverstone FT02 Razer Mamba 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Athlon II X2 255 ASRock 880GMH/USB3.0 Wintec DDR3 4GB Intel X25-M 80 GB 
OSKeyboardPowerCase
Windows 7 with XBMC Iogear wireless keyboard/mouse GKM561R Antec EarthWatts Green 380D Silverstone MLO3B 
MotherboardRAMHard DriveOS
GIGABYTE GA-E350N-USB3 Samsung 1x4GB 2 gig USB OpenElec XBMC 
KeyboardCase
Lenovo Multimedia Remote Keyboard N5902 Habey EMC-600S 
  hide details  
Reply
Big Blue
(15 items)
 
HTPC
(13 items)
 
Bedroom HTPC
(6 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i5 2500k ASUS P8Z68-V PRO/GEN3 Diamond 6950 EVGA GTX 275 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
8 gigs G.SKILL Sniper (2x 4) Corsair 128GB SSD LG BluRay Corsair H60 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Pro 64 bit ASUS 21" & LG 20" Razer Lycosa SeaSonic X750 Gold 750W 
CaseMouse
Silverstone FT02 Razer Mamba 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Athlon II X2 255 ASRock 880GMH/USB3.0 Wintec DDR3 4GB Intel X25-M 80 GB 
OSKeyboardPowerCase
Windows 7 with XBMC Iogear wireless keyboard/mouse GKM561R Antec EarthWatts Green 380D Silverstone MLO3B 
MotherboardRAMHard DriveOS
GIGABYTE GA-E350N-USB3 Samsung 1x4GB 2 gig USB OpenElec XBMC 
KeyboardCase
Lenovo Multimedia Remote Keyboard N5902 Habey EMC-600S 
  hide details  
Reply
post #23 of 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xavier Zepherious View Post

hell - I still haven't got hold of TPU yet - yet they have a 2012 CC thread and were never on the CC forums
Ive posted to TPU, and PM'd their Capts

We are working on it on our end @ TPU. Should have an answer for you in the next few days.
post #24 of 314

Adak, are you serious; no team names anymore? You're saying we should take out one fo the most important parts of the CC - the part where teams actually have to work together to get the most out of their members?

 

As for the "basis", why if everyone happy to accept a system which went so badly last year? Your dual category system doesn't atcually fix anything:

 

• In the PPD category, Evga or OCN will win, end of. If Evga actually got their conversion rate up (or we got rid of CC names entirely), then it's not even a competition, considering they have 4mil PPD more than us, and the HPCS will end during the CC.

 

• In the "basis" category, it has the same flaws as last year. Absolute performance means nothing; a team like OCAU can get 10% of the points of a team like Evga, and yet rank higher than them. All it takes is one or two large Folders for the smaller teams, and then we have the same result as last year; a small team completely dominating the other teams, which simply cannot catch up.

 

 

How on earth can people accept this as a viable system, when everyone was so happy to criticise it last year as being biased towards small teams, and the year before was biased towards big teams?

Megadoomer
(14 items)
 
Family Computer
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X6 1090T @ 4.0Ghz ASUS M4A89GTD PRO Sparkle GTS 450 2x4GB G-Skill Sniper 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung F1 1TB CM Hyper 212+ Windows 7 Professional x64 Samsung T220 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech MX3000 Laser CM 1000M HAF 922 Logitech VX Revolution 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 Asus PN5-D 750i Evga GTS 250 2x2GB Crucial Ballistix 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
750GB Hitachi Samsung Super Writemaster Windows 7 Professional x64 19" Dell 
PowerCase
Corsair 450VX Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
Megadoomer
(14 items)
 
Family Computer
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X6 1090T @ 4.0Ghz ASUS M4A89GTD PRO Sparkle GTS 450 2x4GB G-Skill Sniper 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung F1 1TB CM Hyper 212+ Windows 7 Professional x64 Samsung T220 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech MX3000 Laser CM 1000M HAF 922 Logitech VX Revolution 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 Asus PN5-D 750i Evga GTS 250 2x2GB Crucial Ballistix 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
750GB Hitachi Samsung Super Writemaster Windows 7 Professional x64 19" Dell 
PowerCase
Corsair 450VX Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
post #25 of 314
if we went straight team PPD EVGA would offer a small handicap Zodac - I told you that ... we want a neck in neck race...we want your team as well as ours to push

if we run under the chimp name - conversion - could kill EVGA like last year -it definitely make an interesting race in the PPD race
Remember I think the CC names should stay - even tho my own members have asked for it to be gone


as for the handicap race
if you add conversion like your formula it punishes those who already punished themselves(extra penalty) for not showing up and rewards teams that merge and overproduce (bonus)

this is one reason why EVGA was against it.

and fairness - we already have a point system by stanford and Points

imagine what would happen if small users got the point system changed and top folder now became bottom folder the next day in standings?
look what happen with bigadv point changes - remember how many were PO'd

Crunching has the same thing - we run in crunching contest under rules and a point system that is straight PPD with no issues with 100's of teams and we don't complain
heck EVGA was no where near the top [H] was well above us
and every team tries it's best no matter what

we can probably put a 1/2 dozen or more formula up here to discuss and find something wrong with each that would make it unfair(for some teams) and you probably get only 1/2 the team agreeing at any time because they wind up better than the others and the other half seriously against it

everyone gonna chose the one that favors them and drop the ones they think hurt their team the most
it's only gonna get worse when we have more teams with even wider disparity

secondly you may lose teams because they feel cheated, run over by the process, by a process where little teams take out the big guys and make it impossible for them to compete

this is why you are better off with the PPD in the first place at least keep it as one part of a new format

now saying all that...
the problem is that no other team has really provided any good formula - because there really isn't one for such a disparity in points and teams sizes and makeup

you may hurt teams that really on big rigs (server 2p 4p) or high on smp
or you could hurt teams heavy on GPU's

or by size if we include team growth - then smaller teams have a greater chance to create more points by adding uses both as a percentage of their PPD and if you add in more points for adding members -via the size they already are - (extra points for getting new members - in respect to team size)

as was noted in HWC/NCIX merger noted -there is nothing barring that
heck imagine [H] want to be a spoiler and join a team under their CC name (the whole [H] team)

conversion is a problem for larger teams (you try PM'ing 12000 users? when you can only send to 5 at a time - and no forum support to send out mass mailing)
and then what if they block, are away, forget - and need more notices
let alone change over 1000's of system and expect no errors in the change over?


this is what is wrong....any system can be gamed/any formula can be unfair

there are tons of variables people can bring in...even making it more complicated

making it a race against your own past performance is the only way to work it
this doesn't bar teams from getting help or growing...

next year it might motivate them to grow the team...join/merger teams do what it takes to move up the ladder
post #26 of 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by zodac View Post

Adak, are you serious; no team names anymore? You're saying we should take out one fo the most important parts of the CC - the part where teams actually have to work together to get the most out of their members?

As for the "basis", why if everyone happy to accept a system which went so badly last year? Your dual category system doesn't atcually fix anything:

• In the PPD category, Evga or OCN will win, end of. If Evga actually got their conversion rate up (or we got rid of CC names entirely), then it's not even a competition, considering they have 4mil PPD more than us, and the HPCS will end during the CC.

• In the "basis" category, it has the same flaws as last year. Absolute performance means nothing; a team like OCAU can get 10% of the points of a team like Evga, and yet rank higher than them. All it takes is one or two large Folders for the smaller teams, and then we have the same result as last year; a small team completely dominating the other teams, which simply cannot catch up.


How on earth can people accept this as a viable system, when everyone was so happy to criticise it last year as being biased towards small teams, and the year before was biased towards big teams?

Team names are listed in my spreadsheet I posted!. I never said there would be no team names. There WILL be team names, of course.

In this format, the ENTIRE team should be working together, to maximize their output, instead of only a percentage of the team, as in past years CC races.

In 2011, the BASIS was calculated from a non-CC folding performance period. That skewed the points in favor of small teams, who got lots of help from other folders. This year, the BASIS would include CC performance OR non-CC performance (whichever is higher). That means that if NCIX joins with HWC like last year, they will be given points as if they were the same team, all along -- no increase advantage to them, unless they ACTUALLY fold more points than they did last year.

In a handicap race, a small team will typically will out-produce a larger team. They're better coordinated, have easier and faster communications, and wind up being more motivated.
I'm not saying EVGA couldn't win the handicap bracket, but they would not be favored to win it. That's why two brackets are a good idea. That gives big teams a chance to shine and win a race, and it gives small teams a chance to win in the handicap bracket.

If EVGA is folding the most points during the race, they will win in an Unlimited bracket -- that's what a straight unlimited bracket is all about. It's all about absolute performance, in the Unlimited bracket.
Quote:
All it takes is one or two large Folders for the smaller teams, and then we have the same result as last year; a small team completely dominating the other teams, which simply cannot catch up.

Which means your team needs to do some motivating and recruiting, if you want to win in the handicap bracket! biggrin.gif

It's a little like getting fair representation, in government. In the US, we have:

Senate: Every state, regardless of size, gets two senators
House of Representative: A basis is calculated (basis = total population/500), so the House has 500 members, and every BASIS number of people, has a district and a representative.
(somewhat simplified)

Taken together, big states (Alaska), and small states (Rhode Island), heavily populated states (California), and less populated states (Nevada), all are represented.

In the CC, the "Senate" would be the handicap bracket, the "House of Reps" would be the Unlimited bracket.

I tried a couple "One Bracket only" formula's for points - they did not work well.

Bottom line is, OCN, like my team, is a "Malcolm in the Middle" team. We probably won't beat EVGA in the Unlimited bracket, and we're not able to increase % production, like one of the smaller teams can, usually. I can't see penalizing small teams, just because they're small, or large teams, just because they're large.

In a Handicap bracket, If Team A increases production by 15% and Team B increases by 11%, wouldn't you say that Team A is the winner? Surely, yes.

If you want to have the best chances to win in the Unlimited bracket with this team format, get REAL friendly with "Awacs" and recruit!. wink.gif Your HPCS points won't be included in your basis, because you didn't have HPCS during the CC last year.

Your best chance to beat EVGA in the Unlimited bracket, beside recruiting, is to have the older "change your team name and passkey" format. But after 5 years of using that format, I believe we need a change. I'm not going to mislead you by saying this new team format will give you better chances of beating EVGA in the Unlimited points race, because it won't.

I believe the two bracket format will increase the fun in the race. The "whole team" format is simply an effort to get everyone involved, on the team, and respond to those who have been asking for it, for several years.

If this sounds complicated - well that's just me, digging down into the explanation, a bit much. In reality, the points are simple to figure out, and to understand.

It's just a bit difficult to describe it - that's all. A great gift of gab is not a gift I always have. rolleyes.gif

The *****'s in the first team name, was done by *your* forum software. Apparently, it looked like a bad word. wink.gif

Edited by Adak - 4/12/12 at 2:28pm
post #27 of 314

Adak, this was in your earlier post:

 

Quote:

1) The race would be a team race - no individuals need to change their folding name or passkey. You would race as a team.

 

If you don't need to change your Folding name, that would imply no team CC name.

 

Again, while my initial formula had the conversion rate as having a large influence, that could always be lessened; none of the factors were at final weights - we could have tweaked them if necessary, but the entire thing was dimissed out of hand instead.

 

 

Now, on ot your basis system. While in theory it all seems fine, since you're basing it off a highly competitive period, you're missing one key factor -  PPD changes over the year, and the amount differs greatly for each team. In the case of OCN, we've got from ~10mil during last year's CC, to 20mil PPD... essentially we've doubled it. However, a team like CPC had ~4.3mil last year... and their total production right now is only 4.2mil. While they could increase their production, would it be comparable to the increase other teams have seen? Taking some of the basis from last year's CC, and some from a more recent period (showing current production) would balance that somewhat.

 

Secondly, regardless of the handicap/basis used, and when it was taken from, smaller teams have a much simpler job, and will see much faster benefits. A single 250k Folder could make up 10% for a small team, but only 1% for a team like Evga. So both teams are increasing the work done and research being generated, but one team gets x10 the benefit - that isn't a fair system. That's why last year's event didn't work, and why it won't work again this year. Your comment was this:

 

Quote:

Which means your team needs to do some motivating and recruiting, if you want to win in the handicap bracket! biggrin.gif

 

That was the opinion the captains had last year -  we made a mistake. It would be ridiculous for us to make that mistake again and expect different results.

 

Finally, I still don't see why we have two categories; we stopped the all-out PPD race because we knew it wasn't competitive anymore. Why are we bringing it back?


Edited by zodac - 4/12/12 at 4:30pm
Megadoomer
(14 items)
 
Family Computer
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X6 1090T @ 4.0Ghz ASUS M4A89GTD PRO Sparkle GTS 450 2x4GB G-Skill Sniper 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung F1 1TB CM Hyper 212+ Windows 7 Professional x64 Samsung T220 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech MX3000 Laser CM 1000M HAF 922 Logitech VX Revolution 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 Asus PN5-D 750i Evga GTS 250 2x2GB Crucial Ballistix 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
750GB Hitachi Samsung Super Writemaster Windows 7 Professional x64 19" Dell 
PowerCase
Corsair 450VX Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
Megadoomer
(14 items)
 
Family Computer
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X6 1090T @ 4.0Ghz ASUS M4A89GTD PRO Sparkle GTS 450 2x4GB G-Skill Sniper 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung F1 1TB CM Hyper 212+ Windows 7 Professional x64 Samsung T220 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech MX3000 Laser CM 1000M HAF 922 Logitech VX Revolution 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 Asus PN5-D 750i Evga GTS 250 2x2GB Crucial Ballistix 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
750GB Hitachi Samsung Super Writemaster Windows 7 Professional x64 19" Dell 
PowerCase
Corsair 450VX Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
post #28 of 314
I offered a better weighted tweak Zodac... problem was it wasn't just us two that failed
no one accepted any from you or me or any parts thereof

I also offered a weight system - although it was basic -it could have been tweaked and used

with only 4 teams present(2 mostly) a tough thing to sell - imagine if it was an amalgam of mine and yours and we said take it or leave it
the two biggest teams forcing a formula on the little guys???

if this is all we got agreement on... we work with it.
actually I don't mind it...it just means we run two races simultaneously that's all

and we see how the handicap works -if it fails we will know for sure
I suspect the weighted system I suggested and you came to at the end will be next years basis (something on those lines)

I do however ask that detailed data be kept for purposes of analyzing and developing a better formula next round

we try to keep some of the ideas from last discussion...even some formula ideas

like I said I would have settled for OCAU format...very very last resort was PPD

Am I happy NO...we accomplished little of what we wanted - a real fix to the CC

We have little time to fix it this year.
post #29 of 314

Fair enough; people weren't replying in the captains' forum. However, that doesn't mean this formula is the correct choice either; it doesn't address the flaws from last year, and is more of a backwards step in my eyes than a way forward.

Megadoomer
(14 items)
 
Family Computer
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X6 1090T @ 4.0Ghz ASUS M4A89GTD PRO Sparkle GTS 450 2x4GB G-Skill Sniper 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung F1 1TB CM Hyper 212+ Windows 7 Professional x64 Samsung T220 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech MX3000 Laser CM 1000M HAF 922 Logitech VX Revolution 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 Asus PN5-D 750i Evga GTS 250 2x2GB Crucial Ballistix 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
750GB Hitachi Samsung Super Writemaster Windows 7 Professional x64 19" Dell 
PowerCase
Corsair 450VX Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
Megadoomer
(14 items)
 
Family Computer
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X6 1090T @ 4.0Ghz ASUS M4A89GTD PRO Sparkle GTS 450 2x4GB G-Skill Sniper 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Samsung F1 1TB CM Hyper 212+ Windows 7 Professional x64 Samsung T220 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech MX3000 Laser CM 1000M HAF 922 Logitech VX Revolution 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 Asus PN5-D 750i Evga GTS 250 2x2GB Crucial Ballistix 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
750GB Hitachi Samsung Super Writemaster Windows 7 Professional x64 19" Dell 
PowerCase
Corsair 450VX Antec 900 
  hide details  
Reply
post #30 of 314
I already suggested others to talk to adak about tweaks

I still think team PPD growth is one basis of the handicap
if we keep cc names - - or go back to it conversion must be minor otherwise teams with huge conversion problems get penalized too much -
they are already penalizing themselves by not getting the team out

and same can be said if you join two teams and double your team size -(you are already receiving points above what any team normally should have - and any conversion factor would give bonuses for teaming up

well geeze this would turn into the contest of the tag teams - teams joining up for any bonuses ,to knock off teams and win

if you want that...we can partner up teams - like tag teams- we might need more teams for that
sort of what we do in our internal challenges - balancing them out

anyways if you wanted conversion then it shouldn't affect points by more than 5% and then you use other data-factors for teams to balance out for other differences - to make up for other team advantages

sort of like a list of factors -each one is weighted
what you lose on one factor you make up somewhere else

it not gonna be easy to explain here or to the teams when/if it would be accepted
however this kind of system has normal leveling affect

it would require the teams deciding what factors to accept and track and what weight they should have - not simple

at this late in the game we needed an answer - seeing that a formula would take forever in the CC - this was the only course
this isn't a pretty ending to the CC discussions

this is why i said it had to be more transparent, getting something to the teams to look at - they can send feedback up thru the capts
Edited by Xavier Zepherious - 4/12/12 at 6:26pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Overclock.net Folding@Home Team
Overclock.net › Forums › Overclockers Care › Overclock.net Folding@Home Team › Chimp Challenge 2012??