Analysis of Default XML with Fictional Players v2.0

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Analysis of Default XML with Fictional Players v2.0

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Sports] >> PureSim Baseball >> Analysis of Default XML with Fictional Players v2.0

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Analysis of Default XML with Fictional Players v2.0 - 9/10/2005 3:37:11 AM

BryanK

Posts: 140
Joined: 8/21/2005
Status: offline

Okay...
Took longer than i had anticipated, but I finally found some time to pull all the data together. It's in the slides that you will find by following this link:
http://home.comcast.net/~zbryanknight/Testing_Puresim_XML_2.0.ppt

Here are the quick hits:
1. Stats are pretty consistent from year to year despite the XML multipliers. The most notable exception is 3b, which is *dead* on
2. The distribution of stat outputs for individual players is more skewed towards higher values and less diverse than in real life. (i.e. there's a big clump of "good" players in puresim instead of having some "good" players, a smaller bunch who are "really good", and a few stars)

This analysis is a little less rock solid than the stuff I do at my job... mostly because the time investment would be rather killer if I got this stuff totally buttoned up. So I'd wind up doing hardcore analysis for like a week straight between home and office... and that's kinda draining.
So if you think I jumped to a conclusion, or if anyone has any questions about my assertions -- specifically what's on the "Recomendations" slide, feel free to ask, and I'll elaborate on my thinking.

Shaun -
I can do more of the analysis that's put forth in section 2 -- the distribution piece -- but it's rather time intensive. The same basic points are put forth in section 3, just in a less concise fashion. Given that I have a stack of grad school applications to get through and a huge project at work, it'd be helpful to know exactly what you'd like to see for anything to be actionable before I went ahead and did it.

~Bryan

Post #: 1

RE: Analysis of Default XML with Fictional Players v2.0 - 9/10/2005 5:48:16 AM

DandricSturm

Posts: 492
Joined: 8/7/2005
Status: offline

Vwry cool looking graphs and all and some interesting results, some of which surprise me. (Always seemed to me like K totals were too low.) Perhaps the reason Puresim emulates 1990's baseball is because that's when it was initially developed?

_____________________________

"The Guns, Thank God, The Guns..." - Rudyard Kipling
http://www.bluemax-ara-assoc.com/

(in reply to BryanK)

Post #: 2

RE: Analysis of Default XML with Fictional Players v2.0 - 9/10/2005 2:10:19 PM

lynchjm24

Posts: 240
Joined: 8/21/2005
Status: offline

Thanks for the analysis, it was enlightening.

How about a look at the salary structure ;)

(in reply to DandricSturm)

Post #: 3

RE: Analysis of Default XML with Fictional Players v2.0 - 9/13/2005 2:38:24 AM

roo23

Posts: 10
Joined: 8/24/2005
Status: offline

Very cool analysis - this is just the sort of thing we need to tinker with if we are to approach the *ideal* simulation... Anecdotally, I have started an association in 1919, importing 'real' players from Lahman. Now up to 1934 and I think I'm seeing similar results... Though strikeouts are about right - stayed low until recently... Of course this is only one ass'n -

Keep up the good work it's feedback like this that makes this such a great, living, breathing game.

- Chris

(in reply to BryanK)

Post #: 4