7 comments on “EC Gamewin & Timeout Statistics Summary 2011

  1. Very nice work up.
    The consistency of the numbers is quite remarkable in my opinion.
    Without doing the math i would guess that all differences are well within the statistical margin of error.
    MS

  2. Just quick:

    Let's assume that the 2009, pre-Villein, number is the accepted chance for timeout (34,22%).

    H(0): p=0,3422
    H(1): p>0,3422

    The probabilty value of 2011 is then P(X>=102) = 1-P(X< =101) = 1 -Binominalcdf(n=272, k=101, p=0,3422)= 0,1411 which is well within any accepted statistical variance. One could speak of an upwards trend in case pv would have been less than 0,1 but this isn't the case either. Therefore based on the data from the recent ECs, there is absolutely no reason to suggest that Villein makes game more likely to time. This isn't a very surprising conclusion, since every card that is a Villein now was likely a Minion Tap in 2009 and decks just generally don't contained as much masters as they do now. Since masters have an average poolcost of more than 0, the reduced amount of minion cards (and thus ousting power) is compensated by people spending more pool on masters. I'd do some more analysis, but I should probably put it in a more visible spot than Ralf's comments :)

  3. I do find the increase in Timeouts curious. On samples of 200-300 a deviation of 2-3% is not insignificant. Especially since this also includes the greater availability of some cards because of the 'staples' printed in HttB Starters.

    I'd be interested to see if it would be possible to spread this project a little further and include all of the Continental Championships. The increased sample size would increase the chances of having any significant trends becoming more obvious.

    This consistency may also be a result of a “static” meta-game in Europe, which from my own conversations, seems to be focussed on minimising deck size to reach a goal of 'efficiency'. (I dispute the use of minimisation as a measure of efficiency, but since deck minisation seems to be labelled 'efficiency' lets stick with that).

    I'd be curious to see if such a static trend occurred across the NACs for the last few years and if again, there was a confirmation of consistency in the NAC metagame.

  4. @Juggernaut: Unfortunately I only have the Archons of the EC 2009 to 2011.

    And I don't know how informative the data from the NAC are. The tournaments are usually only one third in size, so the variance would be much higher.

  5. Oh I was thinking of adding those figures into these, to create a greater portrait of “timeouts” in the more competitive VTES scenes. The greater number of data points should improve consistency of the overall data, even if the data that was added was relatively less consistent.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s