Sign in to follow this  
Profomisakari

A Question to the rules off Odd Sumo

Recommended Posts

In Golynohana's Sumo site you can find rules for Odd Sumo.

There I read

* KYUJO *
. . .
if he doesn't bet 15 points during a basho. In this case, a player gets
a 7-8 record
the first time. The second time in a row, it will be counted
as a 0-15 record.
. . .

I don't find other rules.

Why are in the banzuke for my 12 points this basho 0 - 0 - 15 W/L points and not 7 - 8 ?

Or are this no more the rules?

Then should somebody write the real rules for all players readable somewhere in the Odd Sumo site!

Profomisakari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Golynohana's Sumo site you can find rules for Odd Sumo.

There I read

* KYUJO *

. . .

if he doesn't bet 15 points during a basho. In this case, a player gets

a 7-8 record the first time. The second time in a row, it will be counted

as a 0-15 record. . . .

I don't find other rules.

Why are in the banzuke for my 12 points this basho 0 - 0 - 15 W/L points and not 7 - 8 ?

Or are this no more the rules?

Then should somebody write the real rules for all players readable somewhere in the Odd Sumo site!

Profomisakari

Please calm down, Profo. The Banzuke maker will take care that your result is handled like a 7-8. 0-0-15 is used to differentiate between those players who realy finished 7-8 and such cases where less than 15 ANTE are utilized.

Ganzohnesushi

Edited by Ganzohnesushi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don' worry, I am sure Ganzohnesushi, who is oddsumo banzuke maker, will treat you as 7-8, according to original oddsumo rules.

Check a similar case from last Basho:

http://www.sumogames.de/Golynohana/ODDSUMO/OddSumoBashoResultsPerPlayer.aspx?Shikona=Tsunamiko

Tsunamiko got demoted by just 0,5 ranks (from HM14 to NM14).

When I did my programming of this game I did not know this rule, thus my application marks all players who did no spend at least 15 ante as not classified and treat them as absent = 0-0-15.

And I simply did not bother to correct that after I found out about this rule. After all It's up to banzuke maker how he handles such players and Ganzohnesushi does it according to original rules.

Personally speaking I find this rule stupid, because one can take a risk by playing big in first 4-5 days and then just stop playing if he/she didn't win anything, without being penalized by drop in banzuke. But I do just programming and original rules should stay as they are I guess.

Edited by Golynohana

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally speaking I find this rule stupid, because one can take a risk by playing big in first 4-5 days and then just stop playing if he/she didn't win anything, without being penalized by drop in banzuke. But I do just programming and original rules should stay as they are I guess.

I fully second this statement This rule is stupid. Perhaps one day I'll find the time to adjust the current rules a bit, i.e. this rule would then be abolished. I also see a need in modifying the Ozeki promotion rules. Finishing minimum 21-9 as Sekiwake in two consecutive Bashos including two KK doesn't work bad but one might think about the ususal 30-33 wins in three consecutive Bashos (being ranked in Sanyaku for at least two of these Basho).

Ganzohnesushi

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've no problem, if we make new rules and write them into the site.

But in this case I had not started the game this basho.

And thanks for good words!

Profo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to talk about changing the rules of this game, how about giving more reasonable odds instead of ones that make people want to not spend their points? On an even matchup I get a 1.5 multiplier. Supposing I were allowed to only pick one match-up, I would have to win every 2 out of 3 to break even. The fact you have to pick 3 is irrelevant to how the odds work; 3 choices of 1.5 picks would lead to needing to win about 3 out of 10 times, which corresponds to winning 2 out of 3 bouts. If this were real money I were betting, I would get away very very fast; most vig on sports betting is around 10% I think, meaning you need to be right about 6 times out of 11 on a nominal even match-up. Playing the minimum number to get qualified for scoring is a very obvious strategy apparent to anyone oblivious to how the odds work just by looking at old results and seeing pretty much everyone not recouping what they bet.

If you just changed the even match-ups to have a multiplier of 2 and basically left everything else the same, there would no longer be any incentive to not play. Given that the way the odds are calculated are often not really in line with the expectations of a match, people should generally be able to have positive expected value this way and as such should be playing as much as possible. Maybe, maybe, maybe tune it to 1.95 or 1.9 to provide a more reasonable expectation of loss as would be traditional in sports betting, but given the nature of the game I don't see any reason why that's necessary.

Additionally, if you want to maintain the current terrible odds, for people that don't wager enough credits at least you could just subtract the additional amount of credits that would need to be wagered, assuming they lost whatever bets they would have placed. That would be a fair and reasonable representation of how they would have done, at worst.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would just be wrong if "people should be able to have positive expected value". You know, the bank is always winning, so it should be hard to get a positive score. But it's still doable as (very) few players are able to beat the bank. At least in the long run - this basho nothing went right and I finished with 0, but this probably would have been the case with better odds too. Which brings me to the most important point. The primary goal of OddSumo is NOT to beat the bank, it's to win the yusho. And I think better odds would just increase playing for the one day a high bet is lucky enough to win. I like the game strategy better as it is now, because it is much more difficult to get a really high single-day payout.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I like the strategy the way it is. If it's thought that the way it's set up is totally fine and there are no problems, I have no personal complaints. The game just feels like the odds are set arbitrarily low compared to how they'd be set by an actual sports book. Regardless, what's the reason behind making it so hard to come out with a profit that one needs an additional rule to force people to wager? If the players' actual EV were to become very slightly positive but odds-negative (that is, players would be able to use knowledge not reflected in the odds to profit even though they would lose if the odds were precisely proportionate to the true likelihoods) as would likely happen if the implied vig was set at a reasonable value, the rule wouldn't be needed.

(I also have significant issues with the odds calculation method as well, but that would require me doing a significant amount of research to give exact opinions of what's wrong. It may be the case that the method of odds computation is fundamentally based on historical data that gets updated each basho, but from what I recall seeing of it, it seemed pretty arbitrary in comparison. I am not in favor of changing the method personally, I am just concerned that the odds calculation is not particularly accurate. But maybe that's what makes the game interesting and trying to fix it would only make the game less enjoyable. ::shrug::)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(I also have significant issues with the odds calculation method as well, but that would require me doing a significant amount of research to give exact opinions of what's wrong. It may be the case that the method of odds computation is fundamentally based on historical data that gets updated each basho, but from what I recall seeing of it, it seemed pretty arbitrary in comparison. I am not in favor of changing the method personally, I am just concerned that the odds calculation is not particularly accurate. But maybe that's what makes the game interesting and trying to fix it would only make the game less enjoyable. ::shrug::)

Why having issues? The game offers the same conditions for everyone, regardless whether the Odds are 1,1 or 1,7 for a Rikishi's win. In so far all players have the same advantage/disadvantage....

When Golynohana thankfully re-animated this game back in 2008 he had no idea how Kojamuri - the inventor of the game - had calculated the odds in the original version. I think he tested various combinations of algorithms based on actual rank, actual result and H2H results and finally went along with the current version. Of course you may argue that Hakuho at 1,28 vs. Chiyootori on Day 1 was way too high. Simple explanation is that both had a 0-0 score on that day. But again, all players had the same choice....

I like the various strategies you may follow in this game. Some desperados play full risk until Day 10 and then its either Big Win or Game Over for them. Others play extremely conservative (check picks from Frinkanohana and Andoreasu) who in the long run might finish with many KK but most likely will never win a Yusho. The good thing is, depending on your results and the given Odds you may change your strategy every day. Just take the example of Senshuraku in Natsu. With so many bouts obviously "crystal clear" no less than 30 players decided to play a total quota of 10+. But in the end just 2 of them were successful while many others were just too greedy.

Just leave the game like it is, no changes, no updates. It is just brilliant the way it is.

Ganzohnesushi

Edited by Ganzohnesushi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't care if it's changed or not; it's perfectly fair and good enough for its purpose. Asking it to be more realistic in its odds may make the game too serious and too complicated to be worth managing. My issues are more academic and theoretic in nature; I have a nasty habit of dragging my education around whatever hobbies I take up. I probably should just leave this alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this