Korean Team;
Park Junghwan
Kim Jiseok
Lee Sedol
Choi Cheolhan
Na Hyun
Byun Sangil
Lee Jihyun
Chinese Team;
Shi Yue
Chen Yaoye
Gu Li
Zhou Ruiyang
Mi Yuting
Fan Tingyu
Tang Weixing
| Life In 19x19 http://prod.lifein19x19.com/ |
|
| 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) http://prod.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=10032 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | trout [ Wed Mar 19, 2014 5:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
This is Korea vs China team competition. 1st round - 3/21/2014 2nd round - 3/23/2014 (Korea time) Korean Team;Byun Sangil, Na Hyun, Lee Jihyun(selected through tournament), Lee Sedol, Park Junghwan(captain), Kim Jiseok, Choi Cheolhan(Seeded) Chinese Team; Zhou Ruiyang, Fan Tingyu, Chen Yaoye, Gu Li, Mi Yuting, Tang Weixing, Shi Yue(captain) 1st round - 3/21 11am (Korea time) Park Junghwan vs Zhou Ruiyang Kim Jiseok vs Fan Tingyu Na Hyun vs Chen Yaoye Byun Sangil vs Gu Li Lee Sedol vs Mi Yuting Lee Jihyun vs Tang Weixing Choi Cheolhan vs Shi Yue 2nd round - 3/23 10am (Korea time) Park Junghwan vs Shi Yue Kim Jiseok vs Zhou Ruiyang Na Hyun vs Fan Tingyu Byun Sangil vs Chen Yaoye Lee Sedol vs Gu Li Lee Jihyun vs Mi Yuting Choi Cheolhan vs Tang Weixing |
|
| Author: | wolfking [ Thu Mar 20, 2014 8:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
Thank you Trout! Here is what I found from Tom.com: Chinese Team: Shi Yue 时越, Zhou Ruiyang 周睿羊, Fan Tingyu 范廷钰， Chen Yaoye 陈耀烨，Gu Li 古力, Mi Yuting 芈昱廷, Tang Weixing 唐韦星. First round 3/21/2014: Zhou Ruiyang vs Park Junghwan(Captain) Fan Tingyu vs Kim Jiseok Chen Yaoye vs Na Hyun Gu Li vs Byun Sangil Mi Yuting vs Lee Sedol Tang Weixing vs Lee Jihyun Shi Yue(Captain) vs Choi Cheolhan Second round 3/23/2014： Shi Yue(Captain) vs Park Junghwan(Captain) Zhou Ruiyang vs Kim Jiseok Fan Tingyu vs Na Hyun Chen Yaoye vs Byun Sangil Gu Li vs Lee Sedol Mi Yuting vs Lee Jihyun Tang Weixing vs Choi Cheolhan |
|
| Author: | trout [ Thu Mar 20, 2014 5:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
Korean Team; Park Junghwan Kim Jiseok Lee Sedol Choi Cheolhan Na Hyun Byun Sangil Lee Jihyun Chinese Team; Shi Yue Chen Yaoye Gu Li Zhou Ruiyang Mi Yuting Fan Tingyu Tang Weixing |
|
| Author: | trout [ Fri Mar 21, 2014 1:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
Result of 1st round; Lee Sedol defeated Mi Yuting by resign. Shi Yue defeated Choi Cheolhan by resign. Park Junghwan defeated Zhou Ruiyang by resign. Na Hyun defeated Chen Yaoye by resign. Tang Weixing defeated Lee Jihyun by resign. Fan Tingyu defeated Kim Jiseok by resign. Byun Sangil defeated Gu Li by resign. Korea vs China 4:3 |
|
| Author: | trout [ Sat Mar 22, 2014 11:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
Result of 2nd round Gu Li defeated Lee Sedol by resign. Chen Yaoye defeated Byun Sangil by resign. Tang Weixing defeated Choi Cheolhan by resign. Na Hyun defeated Fan Tingyu by resign. Kim Jiseok defeated Zhou Ruiyang by resign. Mi Yuting defeated Lee Jihyun by resign. Park Junghwan defeated Shi Yue by resign. Kprea vs China 3:4 Total 7:7 but Korea's captain Park Junghwan defeated China's captain Shi Yue. So Korea is winner of this tournament. |
|
| Author: | Hushfield [ Sun Mar 23, 2014 1:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
Alright. Nice by Gu Li, beating Lee Sedol here. Perhaps he can use the momentum to swing back in the ten-game match as well. |
|
| Author: | Pippen [ Sun Mar 23, 2014 7:00 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
Hushfield wrote: Alright. Nice by Gu Li, beating Lee Sedol here. Perhaps he can use the momentum to swing back in the ten-game match as well. Well, it was a game where Lee Sedol - in my humble opinion - was clearly ahead after the first 100 moves. It was one of those games where you do not wanna play White because Black (at least optically) seemed to have so much more influence/territory that you do not know how to handle it properly. Then Gu Li teared apart Black's right side with what I would call a Vietcong-like attack series^^. I was surprised that Li could win this game. I do not see any momentum from this game in respect to the Jubango. The odds would be better for Li if he would have lost this game, because then he would have lost the last 4?!? games in a row and pure proability would say that a win would have to come soon for Li, assuming that both players are equally strong - which I believe so (this is from the perspective of the so-called large numbers). In short one can say: With this win he jinxed his chances in the Jubango and Sedol will probaly lead 3-0 after next week^^. |
|
| Author: | hyperpape [ Sun Mar 23, 2014 7:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
Pippen, if you're serious, you're committing what's known as the gambler's fallacy. No matter how many times a fair coin comes up tails in a row, it's no more or less than 50% for the next flip. Of course, with humans there is psychology to deal with. You could say we're outside of pure probability (or more technically that the assumption of independence does not hold). However, from what I know of other sports, explanations in terms of momentum or the "hot hand" tend to not actually be very accurate. So contra you and Hushfield, I suspect that we know nothing about how this game will affect the jubango. |
|
| Author: | Pippen [ Sun Mar 23, 2014 9:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
hyperpape wrote: Pippen, if you're serious, you're committing what's known as the gambler's fallacy. No matter how many times a fair coin comes up tails in a row, it's no more or less than 50% for the next flip. My argument is more inspired by the law of large numbers. If you flip a coin 1000 times it will be about 500 times "heads", so if you have already flipped the coin 500 times and with always "tails" then "it'd be time" for "heads" to show up to justify the law of large numbers. Of course all depends on what a large number is. You could say in this example that 1000 is too little and so on. But the point is: If a row is established where things should alternate then - in the long run - it increases the chances of breaking that row. That may be logically a fallacy, but not practically. If you have a revolver with just two chambers and you play russian roulette then with your idea - after let's say 5 successful attempts - you could say: Next try (6th) I survive with a probability of 50%, good deal, I'll do it again. Probability theory would suggest it is sane, because your shot is 50%, but nobody would do it, because actually it is not 50%, but smaller, because the row of having success has to be changed sooner or later to validify the law of large numbers. So in that sense: If Sedol would have won, he's be 5-0 and Li was due to win game 6th. But since Li won, he jinxed it. It's completely open again, 50/50^^. (I should state that I do have very slim knowledge of stochastics, so be aware of my theories  )
|
|
| Author: | Uberdude [ Sun Mar 23, 2014 9:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
Pippen wrote: hyperpape wrote: Pippen, if you're serious, you're committing what's known as the gambler's fallacy. No matter how many times a fair coin comes up tails in a row, it's no more or less than 50% for the next flip. My argument is more inspired by the law of large numbers. If you flip a coin 1000 times it will be about 500 times "heads", so if you have already flipped the coin 500 times and with always "tails" then "it'd be time" for "heads" to show up to justify the law of large numbers. No. |
|
| Author: | Pippen [ Sun Mar 23, 2014 10:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
Uberdude wrote: Pippen wrote: hyperpape wrote: Pippen, if you're serious, you're committing what's known as the gambler's fallacy. No matter how many times a fair coin comes up tails in a row, it's no more or less than 50% for the next flip. My argument is more inspired by the law of large numbers. If you flip a coin 1000 times it will be about 500 times "heads", so if you have already flipped the coin 500 times and with always "tails" then "it'd be time" for "heads" to show up to justify the law of large numbers. No. If the law of large numbers is true then heads have to show up somehow soon & plenty if it didn't in the first 500 attempts out of 1000. Of course that is simplifying it, because there is no specific large number, so a math-guy would tell: do it 10.000 times and you'll get it 50/50, and if it didn't he'd tell you to do it even more and so on, but anyway: at one point heads have to show up after a consecutive row of tails. At one point Li had to win after a row of Sedol and he did it - just at the wrong time. |
|
| Author: | Uberdude [ Sun Mar 23, 2014 10:27 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
Pippen wrote: If the law of large numbers is true then heads have to show up somehow soon & plenty if it didn't in the first 500 attempts out of 1000. No. Please learn some basic probability. Or even just read the wikipedia page about the law of large numbers seeing as you seem to like talking about it so much. |
|
| Author: | Pippen [ Sun Mar 23, 2014 12:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
Wikipedia: In probability theory, the law of large numbers (LLN) is a theorem that describes the result of performing the same experiment a large number of times. According to the law, the average of the results obtained from a large number of trials should be close to the expected value, and will tend to become closer as more trials are performed. If Li/Sedol are equally strong then their win-loss ratio should tend to 50% in the long run and obviously that suggests that Li will need to win some games after Sedol has won all so far (we assume we start with the first Jubango game). It's just a more global view to the local view of the odds being 50:50. If you flip the coin 20 times and get 20 heads then in the next flip it's still 50:50 to get tails, but when you look from the LLN-perspective you can see a tendency for tails to come up, if e.g. you set 100 times as the maximum of the experiment. (Of course in math this large number not something like 100 or a concrete number, but basically an infinite sequence of experiments, so one could always state that LLN does not say anything - even in tendency - about the next attempt, but then LLN becomes impractical, because infallible.) |
|
| Author: | Uberdude [ Sun Mar 23, 2014 12:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
Pippen wrote: Wikipedia: In probability theory, the law of large numbers (LLN) is a theorem that describes the result of performing the same experiment a large number of times. According to the law, the average of the results obtained from a large number of trials should be close to the expected value, and will tend to become closer as more trials are performed. If Li/Sedol are equally strong then their win-loss ratio should tend to 50% in the long run and obviously that suggests that Li will need to win some games after Sedol has won all so far (we assume we start with the first Jubango game). It's just a more global view to the local view of the odds being 50:50. If you flip the coin 20 times and get 20 heads then in the next flip it's still 50:50 to get tails, but when you look from the LLN-perspective you can see a tendency for tails to come up, if e.g. you set 100 times as the maximum of the experiment. No. It says nothing of the sort. It says that if you do many more trials then the initial bunch of heads will disappear into insignificance. Another quote from the introduction of Wikipedia: Wikipedia wrote: There is no principle that a small number of observations will coincide with the expected value or that a streak of one value will immediately be "balanced" by the others. See the Gambler's fallacy.
|
|
| Author: | uPWarrior [ Sun Mar 23, 2014 12:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
No. People have already told you that you are falling for the Gambler's fallacy, I'll leave you the link this time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy |
|
| Author: | Uberdude [ Sun Mar 23, 2014 12:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
Anyway, back to this thread. I suspect Lee Sedol (I'm not on first name terms like Pippen) takes the jubango more seriously than this tournament so will put more effort in there, but still this result should give Gu Li a boost of confidence (Go game results are certainly not independent like coin tosses). Also I noticed Park Junghwan did well to beat Shi Yue and win the tournament on captain tiebreak as he has a poor record against him (as do many other Koreans). |
|
| Author: | Pippen [ Sun Mar 23, 2014 3:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
I do not want to spam this thread, but the topic interests me, so if it's not wished, please delete or move the "probability stuff". uPWarrior wrote: No. People have already told you that you are falling for the Gambler's fallacy, I'll leave you the link this time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy I do not accept this fallacy as a fallacy. I agrue that if we flip the coin 100 times and if we assume the first 20 times were all heads then within the last 80 tries there will be around 50 tails, while only about 30 heads. This is not what LLN says, this is my simple version of LLN! It says: Since the odds for tails or heads are 0,5, there will be averagly about 50 heads and 50 tails in 100 flips. So I see a tendency there and it matches with everyday experience, doesn't it? Therefore I could see a tendency for Gu Li to win a couple of games after Lee Sedol won already 4 in a row. p.s. LLN itself seems weird, because either an experiment justifies LLN or LLN will say: do more attempts and I will be correct. Seems like an immune theory to me. |
|
| Author: | ez4u [ Sun Mar 23, 2014 3:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
Pippen wrote: I do not want to spam this thread,... Too late!Quote: but the topic interests me, so if it's not wished, please delete or move the "probability stuff". Please do it yourself. 'Off Topic' is holding an open slot for you. This does not belong under Professionals. |
|
| Author: | lemmata [ Mon Mar 24, 2014 12:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
Just came to say that those caricatures are in a whole new stratosphere of awesome. |
|
| Author: | gogameguru [ Mon Mar 24, 2014 9:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 2014 Chosang Realestate Cup(Merchants Property Cup) |
lemmata wrote: Just came to say that those caricatures are in a whole new stratosphere of awesome. We were joking yesterday about how well they captured Choi Cheolhan's hairstyle 
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|