The New Sudoku Players' Forum

[Pat]

however, i see i'm now listed as "Pat 1 -8 3m39s dup-puzzle" -- where did the dup-puzzle occur ??

it happened for rating 2.3/1.2/1.2 --

the first one was originally ignored
and the second took before the parse bug fix

both were recognized after the fix

yes i now see how it happened

i'd call it an unfair penalty,
as the 2nd was posted precisely for the reason that the first had been ignored

but then again, my score here is irrelevant --
i'm just helping the debugging

[Pat]

on page 100, tarek inadvertently made 2 consecutive entries -- and got away without a penalty !!

perhaps the "lightning" mode misses the no-consecutive-entries-by-same-player ??

[TTHsieh]

Code: Select all

 1 . . | 2 . . | 3 . .
 . 4 . | . 5 . | . 2 .
 . . 3 | . . 6 | . . 5
 - - - + - - - + - - -
 4 . . | 7 . . | 5 . .
 . 3 . | . 4 . | . 8 .
 . . 1 | . . 5 | . . 7
 - - - + - - - + - - -
 3 . . | 8 . . | 9 . .
 . 9 . | . 2 . | . 6 .
 . . 8 | . . 9 | . . 4  ED=6.8/4.5/3.4



TTHsieh

[Mauricio]

Code: Select all

+-------+-------+-------+
| 1 . . | 2 . . | 3 . . |
| . 2 . | . 1 . | . 4 . |
| . . 5 | . . 6 | . . 1 |
+-------+-------+-------+
| 5 . . | 6 . . | 7 . . |
| . 7 . | . 8 . | . 9 . |
| . . 2 | . . 5 | . . 4 |
+-------+-------+-------+
| 8 . . | 1 . . | 4 . . |
| . 6 . | . 9 . | . 1 . |
| . . 1 | . . 3 | . . 8 |
+-------+-------+-------+ ED=4.2/4.2/3.6


on page 100, tarek inadvertently made 2 consecutive entries -- and got away without a penalty !!

perhaps the "lightning" mode misses the no-consecutive-entries-by-same-player ??

Read the next 2 post to those posts.

[Pat]

on page 100, tarek inadvertently made 2 consecutive entries -- and got away without a penalty !!

perhaps the "lightning" mode misses the no-consecutive-entries-by-same-player ??

Read the next 2 post to those posts.

hey Mauricio, i actually had read those posts -- my comment though is about what the automatic "referee" sees

[tarek]

-- my comment though is about what the automatic "referee" sees

I thought (as probably did Mauricio) that for this particular case ..... Manual refereeing was the reason.

tarek

[g.r.emlin]

garbled adjustment deleted

[JPF]

Code: Select all

 
 1 . . | 2 . . | 3 . .
 . 4 . | . 5 . | . 1 .
 . . 6 | . . 1 | . . 7
-------+-------+-------
 6 . . | 8 . . | 7 . .
 . 8 . | . 6 . | . 9 .
 . . 4 | . . 2 | . . 6
-------+-------+-------
 4 . . | 9 . . | 1 . .
 . 9 . | . 2 . | . 7 .
 . . 5 | . . 3 | . . 9      ED=10.6/10.6/9.8



JPF

[gsf]

::: status :::

-- my comment though is about what the automatic "referee" sees

I thought (as probably did Mauricio) that for this particular case ..... Manual refereeing was the reason.

the only things manual about the referee are bug fixes
I didn't/don't want to have to deal with a manual appeal process

there was a consecutive post bug that's just been fixed
so tarek will get the consecutive-entry adjustment
that bug had to do with some tricky code that tries to accomodate invalid entries that look valid

yes, penalties due to bug fixes are unfair
hopefully this round will have knocked off most of the bugs introduced by the switch to ER/EP/ED

the one operation that can't be detected right now is post deletion
as we saw it could trigger a consecutive entry
I asked ruud if delete can be disabled on a per-topic basis
otherwise we'll have to go on the no-delete honor system so we can avoid
I did not have deletion with that post diversions

I'm still not sure about games with/without time delay between moves
so for now even games will have no delay (LIGHTNING), odd games will have delay

[g.r.emlin]

::: game 0016 status LIGHTNING :::

Code: Select all

game 0016 2008-02-03+10:16:00-0000 LIGHTNING duration 2d05h dealer Mauricio page 87 (open) 7 players

    1.2/1.2/1.2    1.5/1.2/1.2    1.7/1.2/1.2    2.0/2.0/2.0    2.3/2.0/2.0    2.5/2.5/2.5   
    2.6/2.5/2.5    2.8/2.5/2.5    3.0/3.0/3.0    3.2/3.0/3.0    3.4/3.4/3.4    3.6/3.6/3.6   
    3.8/3.8/3.8    4.2/4.2/3.6    4.4/3.8/3.8    4.5/3.8/3.8    4.6/3.6/3.6    4.7/3.6/3.4   
    5.6/3.8/3.8    5.7/3.8/3.8    6.2/3.8/3.8    6.5/3.8/3.8    6.6/6.6/3.6    6.7/3.8/3.8   
    6.8/4.5/3.4    6.9/3.8/3.8    7.0/7.0/3.6    7.1/7.1/7.1    7.2/7.2/7.2    7.3/7.3/7.3   
    7.4/7.4/7.3    7.5/7.5/3.8    7.6/7.6/3.8    7.7/7.7/3.4    7.8/7.8/3.8    7.9/7.9/3.8   
    8.0/1.2/1.2    8.2/8.2/8.2    8.3/8.3/8.3    8.4/8.4/8.4    8.5/8.5/8.5    8.6/8.6/8.4   
    8.7/8.7/8.2    8.8/8.8/8.8    8.9/8.9/8.9    9.0/9.0/9.0    9.1/9.1/9.1    9.2/9.2/9.2   
    9.3/9.3/9.3    9.4/9.4/9.4    9.5/9.5/9.3    9.6/9.6/7.1    9.7/9.7/9.3    9.8/9.8/9.7   
    9.9/9.9/9.9    10.0/1.2/1.2   10.3/10.3/9.3  10.6/10.6/9.8                               

       submitter  entries  score  response  notes
     -----------  -------  -----  --------  -----
             Pat        1     -8     3m39s  dup-puzzle
             gsf        2      9     6m12s  pearl-diamond*2,dup-rating-tie*2,lower-pearl*2,dup-puzzle*2
     m_b_metcalf        2     83     6m49s  pearl-diamond*2,dup-puzzle
           tarek        6    503    11m31s  consecutive-entry,pearl-diamond*4
         TTHsieh       16   1266     8m41s  consecutive-entry,self-trump,pearl-diamond*11
             JPF        5   1348    19m19s  pearl-diamond*4,last-entry,highest-rating
        Mauricio       26   3309    11m07s  self-trump*3,pearl-diamond*22,dealer
     -----------  -------
               7       58


[TTHsieh]

Code: Select all

 1 . . | 2 . . | 3 . .
 . 3 . | . 4 . | . 5 .
 . . 5 | . . 3 | . . 1
 - - - + - - - + - - -
 5 . . | 6 . . | 1 . .
 . 7 . | . 2 . | . 8 .
 . . 6 | . . 8 | . . 3
 - - - + - - - + - - -
 6 . . | 9 . . | 8 . .
 . 4 . | . 6 . | . 1 .
 . . 9 | . . 7 | . . 2  ED=8.7/8.7/8.4



TTHsieh

[g.r.emlin]

::: adjustment :::

Code: Select all

2008-02-05+16:12:00-0000 TTHsieh self-trump -50


[JPF]

::: comments:::

::: adjustment :::

Code: Select all

2008-02-05+16:12:00-0000 TTHsieh self-trump -50


Just to understand the rules :

Will TTHsieh get :
-50 pts
or # - 50 pts
or 2# - 50 pts



JPF

[Pat]

TTHsieh self-trump -50

strategy --

the score for the new puzzle itself ( ignoring bonuses and penalties )
is higher than the score for the old puzzle which was trumped --

is it higher by 50 ( to make the penalty worthwhile ) ?
it may earn the bonus for last-entry,
in that case it is worthwhile.

[m_b_metcalf]

::: game 0016 status LIGHTNING :::

Code: Select all

game 0016 2008-02-03+10:16:00-0000 LIGHTNING duration 1d10h dealer g.r.emlin index 1320 (open) 7 players



The game opened with Mauricio as dealer!

thanks
will be fixed next status
"LIGHTNING" interfered with the parse

Fine. I would also like to point out that this pattern is a superset of one that I submitted some time ago and that is still in the queue. Just an advance warning.

Regards,

Mike Metcalf