Viewing Page 3 of 53 (Total Entries: 5262) |
![]() |
|
Dec 10th 2006 at 12:29:54 PM |
|
Name: |
Dmitriy |
Comments: |
DB, how about the claimed f*ct that Curtis knows about minesweeper more than most "minesweepers" in the current voting list ? |
![]() |
|
Dec 10th 2006 at 12:14:46 PM |
|
Name: |
Daniel Brim |
Comments: |
Directly from the post from IMC that started this off "Each candidate should be in BestEver." That's a direct quote, you can go back and look at it if you want. Whether or not it's right is one thing, but the criteria is indeed there, and the bottom line is Curtis is not on BE. Like I said, I'm not claiming that this is right or wrong, just stating the fact. |
![]() |
|
Dec 10th 2006 at 12:06:32 PM |
|
Name: |
Dmitriy |
Comments: |
nice buy, Banzhaf, mines..cc domain was free 3 days ago when i sent domains lists to damien Curtis: yeah, i find this quite funny, bacause both Detrusor and Roman _said_ they do not want you to be there. And Damien agrees with them not to add your name on his own (!) list (while he was going to vote for you). That's stupid |
![]() |
|
Dec 10th 2006 at 11:40:00 AM |
|
Name: |
Banzhaf |
Comments: |
IMC website: http://www.minesweeper.cc |
![]() |
|
Dec 10th 2006 at 11:27:16 AM |
|
Name: |
Curtis |
Comments: |
Interesting, I was there but it seems I've been removed. ![]() ![]() I agree with Christoph's suggestion; I've been doing it this way since before the Clone. At first there was only like one other person who agreed with me. BTW, where's the IMC website? |
![]() |
|
Dec 10th 2006 at 10:14:48 AM |
|
Name: |
Dmitriy |
Comments: |
i would not vote until Curtis is not added to the list. |
![]() |
|
Dec 10th 2006 at 09:58:43 AM |
|
Name: |
WP |
Comments: |
@Damien: You didn't put a link to the wiki on the sidebar? I didn't know it existed. I found it really interesting though, discovered some new stuff :P And the IMC article could really be something on the official IMC website. (maybe it's there already?) |
![]() |
|
Dec 10th 2006 at 09:28:10 AM |
|
Name: |
Zhang Shen Jia |
Comments: |
it seem so interesting.. I want to join IMC!! |
![]() |
|
Dec 10th 2006 at 09:03:14 AM |
|
Name: |
damien |
Comments: |
@Zhang: It is a group of 7 minesweeper players who look at world records and make rules. I wrote an article on it, see link. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 10th 2006 at 09:02:19 AM |
|
Name: |
Ian |
Comments: |
@Damien: lol, way to make them radio buttons rather than checkboxes! I've been having a good few days of sweeping, haven't had any more sub-60s but got 62 on a 155, 61 on a 152, so perhaps will break into 59 again soon ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 10th 2006 at 06:00:08 AM |
|
Name: |
Zhang Shen Jia |
Comments: |
damien.. Can I ask a question? What is IMC? |
![]() |
|
Dec 10th 2006 at 05:58:37 AM |
|
Name: |
damien |
Best expert: |
IMC Poll |
Best intermediate: |
http://www.metanoodle.com/minesweeper/polls/imc2006poll.html |
Comments: |
Here is the link. It is also on the homepage. Technically, voting doesn't start until this evening, but you need to register to vote. So, since I'm Christmas shopping this afternoon, I won't add you until this evening anyways! ![]() I will be checking my mail every few hours for new registrations until the voting is complete. |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 10th 2006 at 05:28:02 AM |
|
Name: |
damien |
Comments: |
@schu: I'll post the poll later today. To vote you have to register (send a username and password to me in an email or in IRC). This way voters are vetted. After that, no one sees any of your information again. Your login information is stored in a different database than the poll voting. When you vote, your password is matched against the user table, and a number is retrieved and stored in the poll database (so your name is not by the results). When the results are printed only ID numbers will be displayed (or maybe none...haven't decided). The voting is automatically blocked after midnight 26 Dec as agreed. You can vote many times, but only your last vote will be registered. You can vote for yourself! Last year I was pretty sure I was going to be elected, so I didn't vote for myself....I voted for someone I wanted to get on if I didn't. |
![]() |
|
Dec 10th 2006 at 02:48:11 AM |
|
Name: |
Zhang Shen Jia |
Best intermediate: |
13.54 -> 12.56!!!! |
Comments: |
in a 33 board...wahahahahahaha now i was fighting for sub50:) |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 10th 2006 at 01:03:42 AM |
|
Name: |
Schu (Andrew McCauley) |
Comments: |
@ Christoph: cool! So you also have a way of only allowing those with sub-100 total (and those with worse times that the IMC have allowed) to vote too? If so, that's pretty much perfect! Thanks guys! |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 10th 2006 at 12:21:26 AM |
|
Name: |
Christoph |
Comments: |
Yes, this poll post is from Damien. And even better, the poll is created in a way that even he himself would have some work to find out who voted for whom. He'll post the details here when the election starts. |
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 10:28:54 PM |
|
Name: |
Jake |
Best expert: |
38 :P |
Best intermediate: |
8 :P |
Best beginner: |
0 :P |
Comments: |
I have no problem with Dion getting a 37. Does this mean Luke will start claiming a 36? ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 07:05:32 PM |
|
Name: |
Tam Minh Bui |
Best intermediate: |
3,90 -> 3,27 RQP |
Comments: |
An extremely nice board provided me with an extreme outlier record for intermediate RQP. The game is a 14,29 on a 58 @ 4,36 3bv/s ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 06:55:34 PM |
|
Name: |
Schu (Andrew McCauley) |
Comments: |
About timer: I have to think about this. Joni has raised a good argument, with which I only have a few problems and I want to think it out before I reply. One thing I have to ask: is there anyone around still that thinks that having Dions record as 38.549 should be kept, instead of having 37.549, 37, or 38? Does anyone truly want to keep this systematic error we've had and display decimal times as +1? I think that's an important concept to get out of the way so we can move to more important things about the timer system. About elections: I have a couple of issues. 1. Can I vote for myself? If I can I will, but I would be kind of relieved if I couldn't because I'm having to toss up between the incumbent IMC members, Gergely, DB and myself, making 8 people, and not being able to vote for myself would make that much simpler. As it is, I have only definitely chosen 5 votes and have to pick one person to leave the list which isn't easy. But regardless of my choices in this election, I think it's silly not to allow people to vote for themselves if they think they're one of the 7 best people for the job. Also, about the system of voting: is that poll for IMC votes Damien? That might be ideal... I'm worried about how silent this election is, and I wouldn't want to have someone I don't vote for have to read my e-mail with my votes, especially since they would be in my top 8 if I did leave them out. Maybe we could say who we want to open the e-mail? Something like that? Or have someone collect the votes that isn't one of the candidates and if possible doesn't even play minesweeper or know the candidates. But if this poll is done properly, it could be just as good. Cheers, Schu |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 06:33:04 PM |
|
Name: |
Daniel Brim |
Best expert: |
53 |
Comments: |
Finally, after a two month sub60 drought, and a bunch of close calls/LCs/whatever, I got a decent result. 55 on a 139! I've been sweeping at the computer lab at school, and surprisingly, after one gets used to the huge mouse, it's a better setup than what I was using before! The video is linked. This sweeping session also featured a 19 on a 67, my new best 3bv for a sub20. A good night indeed. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 05:28:54 PM |
|
Name: |
damien |
Comments: |
The IMC has agreed to allow voting on a poll I have created. I will post the link tomorrow, when voting is allowed to start. |
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 02:56:55 PM |
|
Name: |
Thomas |
Comments: |
I like the idea the way WP just posted it, of course I would propose rounding down. Also, I would take the decimal total and round it for the total. But I like the design!!! @all gb voters: remember that you have to send an email to i.m.c@hotmail.com to vote. Just in case you didnt ;) Thanks to all those who voted for me!!! ![]() VC=UNGR |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 02:46:42 PM |
|
Name: |
WP |
Comments: |
@Joni: I like your point about the imprecision of record-comparing (basically due to the role of luck in the game) And thanks for avoiding me a double post! :P And a tiny detail about Christoph’s idea: Instead of 0.700 (1) - 9.910 (10) - 37.589 (38) – 49 why not 1 (0.700) – 10 (9.910) – 38 (37.589) – 49 ? since the sum isn’t in brackets (I said it was a tiny detail!) |
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 02:20:40 PM |
|
Name: |
Christoph |
Comments: |
@WP: Yes, I thought very short about taking the sum about the real times and going to the next integer, but that would have been nonsense since that wouldn't be compareable to the old integer scores - and these are the main reason to take integers. |
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 01:24:00 PM |
|
Name: |
spellchecker |
Comments: |
vore = vote ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 01:10:54 PM |
|
Name: |
Dmitriy |
Comments: |
ok, my vore is: Elmar Christoph Damien Curtis Schoo Gergely DB |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 01:08:03 PM |
|
Name: |
Rasmus H. Jensen |
Comments: |
Talking about that sub 20 RQP. Est. 59, 203/205, 3,473BV/s, 17,2RQP... And NOT a 50/50! ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 09:53:38 AM |
|
Name: |
AreOut |
Comments: |
I agree with Chris, btw joni we all have the same amount of luck in average, well, except Manu and Lev |
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 09:10:55 AM |
|
Name: |
joni |
Best expert: |
61x3 |
Comments: |
forgot to mention that my best expert is 61.07 ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 08:44:30 AM |
|
Name: |
WP |
Comments: |
Argh, and I forgot to reply to Christoph’s post: I can live with that :) (though I find it messy (this word again :P)) But take note that it’s because the total is the sum of the integer times! |
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 08:40:06 AM |
|
Name: |
joni |
Comments: |
I tried to be as clear as i could ![]() From the beggining of this discussion (timer + 1 issue) I have been one of the "undecided". I have absolutely no problem with how the things are displayed right now, but I don't think I'd be bothered that much by a change either. The discussion I have followed with more interest is the one about integer vs decimal ranking. I have listened to your arguments and I have come to the conclusion that all those decimals in the ranking give a false feeling of precision. It might be good to know down to the thousand what time did you take to complete a particular board, but it's when comparing with the others that I think the decimals lose their significance. Let me give an example. Athletics. The 100m. The IAAF chooses to measure times to the hunderdth of a second. BUT 100 meters in a straight line are always 100 meters, whether in London, Paris, New York or Zurich. The tracks are made by similar materials. You just need to RUN. Who runs faster is the better athlete. If A's alltime personal best is 9.91, and B's is 9.95, we can say that A deserves to be ranked higher. If B would have been able to run faster he would have gotten a better time (during one of the many 100m races he has run) On minesweeper we are comparing times of people on boards that can vary by a huge amount between them. [the following numbers are realtime] One may have done his record on a board with 10 guesses and was so lucky to have gotten them all right and finish in 57.85. Another has gotten it on a "simple board" (judging by 3BV/OBV openings numbers or whatever) that luckily had no guesses and finished in 57.467. Someone else got it on a board with 1 guess, made 7 unforced guesses and finished it in 57.19. Can we compare these guys' games with one-another? Can we rank them with absolute precision? What is happening here is that we DO have a very good measuring accuracy, we DO know that those times are accurate, BUT The problem is the ranking system we have chosen (i.e. time) IS intrinsically NOT AS ACCURATE because it's dependent on many other factors. If you decide to use the decimal sum to do the ranking you would have an uncertainty of +/- 3/1000 (i.e. you would be be completely ignoring the uncertainty introduced by the ranking system) Personally, I am positive with the fact that the current BestEver realises that these guys with different styles playing on very different boards are capable of doing RECORD times very close to one-another and CHOOSES not to determine a better player but to assign them the same expert score (The current BestEver chooses to assign them a 58 since they all finished the game on the 58th second) Tomorrow, the first guy might get a board with less guesses, the second guy might play more efficiently, the third might take more risks... and one of them might improve their time and move ahead, but today they are considered to be at the same level. It took me a while to organize those thoughts, hope you read it and found it clear ![]() BTW, I think Christophs suggestion looks interesting. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 08:37:59 AM |
|
Name: |
WP |
Comments: |
If you want to make a top 10 expert times list, of course decimal times (and in this case, I would say realtimes) would be better (though I must also say that it looks a real mess :P) Actually I would say that that’s the actual reason why I don’t want realtimes to be used, because it’s messy. You have to consider what exactly you are trying to compare. As you see, in your top 10 times list, you are comparing the times, and then putting the name of the person who got them. But in the rankings, we are comparing people, so integer times are enough. (and a lot less messy!) About the Guiness record, it would be a time record, so precision would be appropriate. |
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 08:06:08 AM |
|
Name: |
Schu (Andrew McCauley) |
Comments: |
@ WP: I'm confused.... Why do you think that precision should only be used for Guinness book of Records, and not for ourselves?? I have to check with you WP, do you want decimal times at all ro be used? (except for Guinness purposes like you said). If the answer is no, what if someone wanted to put up a top 10 expert times list? Here's around about what it would look like with real time: 1. 37.549, Dion Tiu 2. 38.29, Jake Warner 3. 38.447, Dion Tiu 4. 38.52, Dion Tiu 5. 38.84, Oliver Scheer 6. 39.34, Damien Moore 7. 39.4, Dion Tiu 8. 39.87, Oliver Scheer 9. 39.94, Dion Tiu 10. 39.991, Dion Tiu Using only integers, one would be forced to do something like this: 1. 38, Dion Tiu =2: 39, Dion Tiu (x2), Oliver Scheer, Jake Warner =6: 40, Dion Tiu (x3), Oliver Scheer, Damien Moore Not using decimals makes something like that very very ugly, it's so much nicer to have a list, and individual (not tied) ranks. BTW, I'm pretty sure Jake has a 40 or two as well, so sorry, didn't have your stats, and it's possible Oli or Dion got another 40 and didn't bother telling us or updating clone rankings I guess (I imagine Damien would have told us if he got a syndrome). It is nice to know, though, that there have been at least 10 real sub-40s! Well, unless you're going to discount Jakes because of being under probation or whatever. |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 04:58:04 AM |
|
Name: |
Christoph |
Comments: |
Just to give my oppinion to the timer issue: I think we should display decimals and we should display the real time. But for making it compareable to the old scores we should go up to the next integer and count this in the BE. So Dions score would read: 0.700 (1) - 9.910 (10) - 37.589 (38) - 49 So everybody can see the real time and we could keep up with the actual scoreing system, so there are no troubles with the old scores. - it's just my idea, if there are better ones around, tell us about. |
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 04:35:13 AM |
|
Name: |
WP |
Comments: |
I think that if Minesweeper scores ever get into the Guiness book of records, using realtime with the maximum precision possible is a good idea. But for rankings it's different. ;) |
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 03:12:18 AM |
|
Name: |
Schu (Andrew McCauley) |
Best expert: |
58.001 (57.001) |
Comments: |
Some of you might remember my attempts to get minesweeper into the Guinness book of records. The way to do this for video games is via the twingalaxies website. I had been talking to an official for that, and he was quite helpful, but he's somewhat missing as of late and won't reply to my pm's. I would very much like everyone who reads this to post in the thread linked, since it seems to be the only way to communicate left, force of numbers. Try to read the whole thread (it isn't long) so any arguments you make are pertinent and make sense. So if anyone and everyone here can just make a post over there to remind everyone that minesweeper is important, it would be really good. Maybe even a message from the outgoing IMC (and later, one from the incoming IMC). About time+1, we have the precision, so why not use it? And if we do succeed in getting on the guinness book of records, and we are stuck with a time like 38.589 seconds? People will think it's a second more than it really is. I guess the options are, don't use time more precise than one second, or use precise time and treat it properly. I would very much want the precision to be a part of it. Especially considering my expert high score! |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 9th 2006 at 02:44:32 AM |
|
Name: |
WP |
Comments: |
@Curtis: so it would be much easier to say that the expert WR is 38 ;) |
![]() |
|
Dec 8th 2006 at 10:26:09 PM |
|
Name: |
Dane |
Best intermediate: |
3bv/s 2.916 ---> 3.104 |
Comments: |
and rqp 8.642 --> 8.109 ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 8th 2006 at 06:40:03 PM |
|
Name: |
Daniel Brim |
Best expert: |
20.07 RQP |
Comments: |
I know how you feel, Rasmus ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 8th 2006 at 05:50:25 PM |
|
Name: |
Rasmus H. Jensen |
Comments: |
I'm amazed how I've managed to NOT break the 20 RQP on exp. New rec tho' 20,088 - 59 on a 173. With impressive 89 flags ![]() Yes, I'm seriously thinking of going. Would be cool if 3-4 Danes showed up to the tournament. The 4th being Lanyje ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 8th 2006 at 03:51:35 PM |
|
Name: |
Curtis |
Comments: |
![]() WP: The confusing part is that anyone who has never played on the Clone and sees that the expert WR is 38.589 will NOT think that this means 37.589; even if they are aware that the original starts at 1. The databases can be changed to reflect the new timing, so there isn't any trouble comparing. If someone is looking through the old guestbook, just subtract 1 from all posts in 2006 or earlier. (How about changing on Jan 1, 2007?) |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 8th 2006 at 03:40:31 PM |
|
Name: |
Jake |
Comments: |
time to sweep the mine list: [15:28:45] * Badgers votes mlar, kolar, christoph, schu, rogen, DB, gergely |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 8th 2006 at 03:32:33 PM |
|
Name: |
AreOut |
Comments: |
So mine list would be schu + chris +damien + elmar + gergely + rod(db if rod declines or does not fulfill strict IMC requirements) + curtis |
![]() |
|
Dec 8th 2006 at 03:23:50 PM |
|
Name: |
AreOut |
Comments: |
OK I nominate Curtis ![]() Btw Curtis I have way better scores on msx than those high scores on your site ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 8th 2006 at 03:11:48 PM |
|
Name: |
Curtis |
Comments: |
Glad to see that support is growing for removing the +1. ![]() Thomas: Currently if someone gets 59.01 (real time) seconds, they haven't broken the minute barrier, since the original (and the Clone) count that as 60. So the "rounding up" keeps that the same. But either rounding works, or you could round to the nearest integer. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 8th 2006 at 03:02:31 PM |
|
Name: |
Elmar |
Comments: |
I agree. I proposed making discussion open at the beginning of the first term. However, there are some discussions that should better be kept private (like our 10 step plan for taking over the world). ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 8th 2006 at 02:49:21 PM |
|
Name: |
WP |
Comments: |
Oops, my last post was slightly misleading. I didn't mean that I hadn't done html before, just never tried uploading it, but I guess it should be like any other file, which is why I said I'd try and see...and well, it worked :) (so it's linked) VC: the5 hmm...the 5 what? :P I only divided what I had to say into 4 parts...and here's the 4th: about IMC discussions. While I'm at it, I'll say this as well : I hope that IMC discussions will be made public, and it would be even better to NOT have separate IMC discussions. I felt that after the last election, the IMC members sort of stopped posting their views on anything. It was a pity because I felt that you were all trying not to voice any views unless if they were "the IMC view". But being in the IMC doesn't make someone any less an individual, and he can still have his opinions, even though they might differ from those of the other 6 members! And about not having separate IMC discussions, it's just because everyone's views count, not just those in the IMC. So why not pool all the ideas? |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 8th 2006 at 01:43:45 PM |
|
Name: |
WP |
Comments: |
HTMLify it?!!! ![]() ![]() ![]() It's a good idea actually, that makes it slightly less formal than a .doc. Never done that before though, will try and see! ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 8th 2006 at 12:22:58 PM |
|
Name: |
Thomas |
Comments: |
Forgot the link *lol* VC=TBBT |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 8th 2006 at 12:09:53 PM |
|
Name: |
Thomas |
Comments: |
Why don't you want to turn it into a .doc? My suggestion is to HTMLify it and upload it ;) @joni: That's the reason I put it all into a .doc file - I thought that posting on the GB led to long and confusing posts, as you said, and I thought that it would be nice to write down exactly what I think. Also, I had the feeling that some of my points were misunderstood. I'll attach the link to my text as "Website" from now till the election so everyone will be able to access it easily when my last entry is pages back. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 8th 2006 at 12:07:21 PM |
|
Name: |
Elmar |
Comments: |
That's why I am on the IMC. ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 8th 2006 at 11:22:13 AM |
|
Name: |
joni |
Comments: |
i think Elmar was right from the beggining. We should have started "per topic" threads on the forum. The guestbook is so dispersive and the fact that people address different issues on the same post doesn't help... |
![]() |
|
Dec 8th 2006 at 10:59:42 AM |
|
Name: |
WP |
Comments: |
Thomas, did you HAVE to do that? Now I’ve written up a long text (though not as long as yours :P ) to counter what you said and I’m wondering what to do with it! I don’t want to make a .doc file like you did, but posting it here would take up a lot of space and putting it on planet-minesweeper would make it totally detached from the rest of the discussion and senseless. I'll think about that and get back to you all later (suggestions are welcome ;) ) |
![]() |
|
Dec 8th 2006 at 05:01:03 AM |
|
Name: |
Thomas |
Comments: |
OK, I guess I'm done writing up my ideas. The .doc file is linked below! I have a new email address BTW, it is thomaskolar90@gmail.com. I know I wrote this already, but you can always email me if you want to know my opinion on something specific. I will answer questions on the GB too of course though ;) |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 7th 2006 at 07:31:39 PM |
|
Name: |
Arjádre |
Comments: |
I thank DB and Schu for the nomination, but I'm afraid I'll have to decline (at least this year). I stayed up late working on a chem lab this past Monday and my parents deleted minesweeper and disconnected my computer from the internet (again) ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 7th 2006 at 11:55:31 AM |
|
Name: |
Rodrigo |
Comments: |
Hello everyone! Since some days ago, I came to Rio de Janeiro (Brazil's second biggest city) to visit a professor at the local Federal University, and I finally found time to post something here! ![]() Today I am flying back home, to Vitória (my home city). Then, I will post something about the elections, etc. Also, I will answer some e-mails (I received them, I just didn't have time to reply yet - specially Schu's e-mail ![]() ![]() ![]() Happy sweeping for everybody! ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 7th 2006 at 08:17:56 AM |
|
Name: |
Thomas |
Comments: |
Does having a tourney in february rule out one in july ;) ? I want the title back ![]() Don't worry, Completion is one of the things I want to train ![]() Remember the post where I announced my training program? I decided not to do it and stop sweeping almost completely for a while, probably till christmas, and then maybe pull a manu ![]() And now I'm gonna take a break from active sweeping... Of course, that doesnt mean that I dont want to become part of the IMC or do work there! I also intend to write a big part, if not all of it, of my programme this evening. If not I should get it done sometime early tomorrow afternoon. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 7th 2006 at 08:06:19 AM |
|
Name: |
Christoph |
Comments: |
@Areout: There will be the Vienna international minesweeper meeting in the summer - most probably in the second half of august. In february we'll meet for a local championship (Tommy and I are also thinking about how to motivate other countries to hold championships - it's a good 1st step, if we can find a system that works in Austria.) |
![]() |
|
Dec 7th 2006 at 06:47:44 AM |
|
Name: |
AreOut |
Comments: |
And why not in July like always?! ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 7th 2006 at 05:36:03 AM |
|
Name: |
Christoph |
Comments: |
Yes, I'll upload the results. But first I intend to write a report about the last tournament ![]() If someone wonders why Tommy is speaking about february: we plan the next Austrian championship to be held in february. And if I'll be able to move my hand smoothly again by then... you'll need a very impressive completion rate to take the title away from me ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 7th 2006 at 04:35:18 AM |
|
Name: |
Thomas |
Comments: |
Hehe, I was waiting for you to post that... I'll play density before february, that should get my completion rate up to scratch ;) I would really like to rewrite what I said on the Guestbook, but I dont have the time. I didnt even have time to play since last sunday... And that was density... I have a long weekend from friday to sunday though, so I will write up my ideas then. So, if you want to read that and get a clear idea for what my ideas are before you vote for me, I should get it done by saturday ![]() Are you going to upload the tournament results christoph? And do the vids work? |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 6th 2006 at 12:46:11 PM |
|
Name: |
Christoph |
Comments: |
I've to say 3 things today: 1st: IMC elections are comeing closer and - yes - I'd like to be reelected. My next year will be a bit less intense than the actual one, so I'll have enough time to focus on the work for the IMC. However, I'm sure I'll do a good job. 2nd: Last weekend some sweepers from Vienna (including Thomas and me) met for an Austrian championship. We played a session for each level and afterwards a final between the two best players. Thomas won all the level sessions but in the final I had the better end to lift the Austrian championship. 3rd: I just watched some of my recent vids and compared them with the ones from half a year ago. That showed me, how much the injury of my right hand drags me down. I work every day to get everything fixed again and you can expect me to play at my best again at the world championship. |
![]() |
|
Dec 6th 2006 at 10:53:57 AM |
|
Name: |
WP |
Comments: |
@Damien : Nah, I didn’t decline, just voiced some thoughts :P And why didn’t someone tell me I could when I said I wanted to nominate Stevan? He’s not on the planet-minesweeper bestever, that’s why I wondered...(okay, so he declined, but then again...) @Dennis: good to see that you're back and in the running! ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 6th 2006 at 06:46:40 AM |
|
Name: |
Dennis Lütken |
Comments: |
@Damien: Thanks! ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 6th 2006 at 06:01:49 AM |
|
Name: |
AreOut |
Comments: |
I decline ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 6th 2006 at 05:50:31 AM |
|
Name: |
damien |
Comments: |
This is just a reminder that Friday is the last day for nominations for the IMC (final list will be published on Monday). So far, only the following people have been nominated: Schu, Arjadre, Christoph, Damien, DBrim, Elmar, Gabriel, Gergely, Nikolaj, Rodrigo, Roman, TKolar, WP. WP: did you decline? Detrusor and Dan do not want to be nominated, and Jake (Badgers) also declined. I nominate Manu, Dennis, Stevan, Dmitriy and Alain (Ace). (I think that makes everyone in the top25 who seemed interested). ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 6th 2006 at 03:08:58 AM |
|
Name: |
AreOut |
Comments: |
Well Schu...I dont have visa ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 5th 2006 at 09:59:24 PM |
|
Name: |
Schu (Andrew McCauley) |
Comments: |
Speaking of tournaments, how about the minesweeperlive one? Both players play the same board, each board is solvable without guessing, and hitting a mine costs you 5 seconds. The more people expressing interest, the more likely it is to happen, so sign up and show you want to take part! |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 5th 2006 at 07:31:38 PM |
|
Name: |
Dennis Lütken |
Comments: |
I'm definitely thinking about going. I've always wanted to and now I might have an extra incentive to go, so I'm considering it very seriously. Is the date set yet? More or less? Would just be cool to know when it is exactly. Are you coming, Rasmus? |
![]() |
|
Dec 5th 2006 at 03:49:57 PM |
|
Name: |
Rasmus H. Jensen |
Comments: |
Training has begun for the coming world championship =) Getting some bloody good estimates, but best finished is a 55 on a 149. Dennis and Martin... Are you thinking of going? Grats to all record breakers. |
![]() |
|
Dec 5th 2006 at 03:17:35 PM |
|
Name: |
joni |
Comments: |
I found a Swedish band named "MS Roej", phonetically equal to "MS Röj" (ö is pronounced like "a" in "a book", while "j" like "y" in "hey!") that means "MS Minesweeper" in Swedish ![]() ![]() ![]() So know we know there's even a band named minesweeper, maybe Microsoft might decide to invite them to play something at the next world championships in Budapest ![]() BTW grats Rogen! you're really on a roll! ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 5th 2006 at 02:38:06 PM |
|
Name: |
Dennis Lütken |
Comments: |
@Roman: You're on fire! Congrats! ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 5th 2006 at 12:44:44 PM |
|
Name: |
Roman Gammel |
Comments: |
Sorry for posting again... That was NF... |
![]() |
|
Dec 5th 2006 at 09:28:41 AM |
|
Name: |
Roman Gammel |
Best intermediate: |
sub4 RQP (3.96) |
Comments: |
13.86 sec on 3BV 45 with 3BV/s 3.50 |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 5th 2006 at 06:54:52 AM |
|
Name: |
Schu (Andrew McCauley) |
Comments: |
@ Benny: Thanks! I have already been nominated though. I'll talk to you soon. |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 5th 2006 at 04:10:21 AM |
|
Name: |
Banzhaf |
Comments: |
oh my god, we have people coming from the future in our community o.O ::: Lloyd Rhoads (last update: 2037-03-14 12:44:16) ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 5th 2006 at 12:39:47 AM |
|
Name: |
Benny Benjamin |
Best expert: |
64 |
Best intermediate: |
18 |
Best beginner: |
2 |
Comments: |
Haven't exactly been following. If Schu has not yet been nominated for the IMC, I'd like to nominate him. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 4th 2006 at 06:36:08 PM |
|
Name: |
Kat |
Comments: |
@Ace: ACE!!!!! |
![]() |
|
Dec 4th 2006 at 06:15:33 PM |
|
Name: |
Gabriel de Tarragon |
Best expert: |
45 |
Best intermediate: |
12 |
Best beginner: |
1 |
Comments: |
hello sweepers :-) I am candidate for the elections of december for the comitee. i'll try to post here several times in the next days... |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 4th 2006 at 03:01:08 PM |
|
Name: |
Schu (Andrew McCauley) |
Best expert: |
58.001 |
Comments: |
Finally I got my 3rd sub-60! 59.233 on a 143, my 2nd best time and 6th best RQP. .722 IOE and 3.4 clicks per second. And of course, congrats to Ace! |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 4th 2006 at 02:31:51 PM |
|
Name: |
Anth |
Best beginner: |
5 |
Comments: |
Ok... I got to say minesweeper is sweet :] But it took sometime for me to understand the thing. I got a 5 second on beginner is baically luck |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 4th 2006 at 02:27:41 PM |
|
Name: |
joni |
Comments: |
Vraiment bien joué! ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 4th 2006 at 12:38:49 PM |
|
Name: |
Ace |
Best expert: |
47 |
Best intermediate: |
15x14s --> 12!!!! |
Best beginner: |
1 |
Comments: |
I finally made it, I got my 1st 14 more than a year ago, and today I didn't stop playing int, getting 83 sub20s before I get this 12. ![]() This brings my total to 1 minute! ![]() Video linked above... ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 4th 2006 at 08:46:24 AM |
|
Name: |
Jenavieve Moore |
Comments: |
Hey Dae, Site's looking good. Give me a call soon; I really miss you. Loves, Jen> |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 4th 2006 at 05:32:07 AM |
|
Name: |
WP |
Comments: |
Gabriel de Tarragon has mentioned that he would like to be a candidate for the IMC, so I nominate him. |
![]() |
|
Dec 4th 2006 at 05:26:24 AM |
|
Name: |
brandon the great |
Best expert: |
85 |
Best intermediate: |
20 |
Best beginner: |
3 |
Comments: |
i kick ass ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 4th 2006 at 05:21:44 AM |
|
Name: |
Schu (Andrew McCauley) |
Comments: |
Gratz to Ian, and especially Kat! Not long until there's a new aussie on the Best ever I hope ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 4th 2006 at 03:32:38 AM |
|
Name: |
Kat |
Comments: |
@joni: NF 3vb was 152, 4th ever NF exp for me ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 3rd 2006 at 10:56:00 AM |
|
Name: |
joni |
Comments: |
huh I was distrated and posted that without finishing to write what I intended to. Of course I wanted to congratulate Kat ![]() ![]() I was curious to know on what 3BV was your NF expert record made. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 3rd 2006 at 10:46:33 AM |
|
Name: |
joni |
Comments: |
grats Ian ![]() ![]() ![]() I watched your games and I must say I'm impressed (or should I say shocked ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 2nd 2006 at 10:41:46 PM |
|
Name: |
Kat |
Best expert: |
82.168 |
Best intermediate: |
24.507 (new) |
Best beginner: |
3.327 |
Comments: |
Yay!! as well as the new int time i took about 5 secs off my int NF time, (now 26.322) and aboout 20 secs off my exp NF (now 108.475). My attempts at a new beg NF time failed but i broke my 3bv/s rec for both beg and exp NF. Also RQP for all 3. |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 2nd 2006 at 02:53:03 PM |
|
Name: |
roger linebarger |
Best expert: |
89 |
Comments: |
yy |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 2nd 2006 at 11:55:44 AM |
|
Name: |
Tam Minh Bui |
Comments: |
I knew you'd break that minute barrier soon Ian, congratulations! |
![]() |
|
Dec 2nd 2006 at 10:34:38 AM |
|
Name: |
Ian |
Best expert: |
61.66 --> 60.83 --> 59.88!!! |
Best intermediate: |
17.08 --> 15.77!!! |
Comments: |
YAHOOOO!!!! I had an extremely good (or perhaps lucky!) night of sweeping yesterday, and smashed OMB and 16s on Int!! Total has gone from 80.5 --> 77.2! The Int game was on a 32 board which I nailed fairly well. The 60s exp game (which I got before the 59) was on a very easy 115 board, but the 59 was on a 129, so that's pretty cool ![]() Vids are in my folder (linked). WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOT!! ![]() |
![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 1st 2006 at 08:56:09 PM |
|
Name: |
Schu (Andrew McCauley) |
Comments: |
Rogens 45 on youtube linked! ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Dec 1st 2006 at 10:39:22 AM |
|
Name: |
Banzhaf |
Best intermediate: |
21->19 |
Comments: |
yeyeyey sub20 ))))) aar it feels good |
![]() |
|
Dec 1st 2006 at 05:43:55 AM |
|
Name: |
Elmar |
Best expert: |
NF: 50 (49) |
Comments: |
@Thomas: Why don't you tell us something we don't know? ![]() @Rogen: Grats! Is the vid on youtube? I'd like to see this... ![]() |
![]() |
|
Dec 1st 2006 at 04:31:40 AM |
|
Name: |
Thomas |
Comments: |
Hi! I guess we can definetly rule out vista minesweeper for rankings, I asked someone from my school who has vista already and he told me that it was possible to UPK. VC=4437 (First time I've had only numbers AFAICR) ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Nov 30th 2006 at 11:55:17 PM |
|
Name: |
Thomas |
Best expert: |
NF 63 :P |
Comments: |
Holy fu.cking sh.it nice rogen!!!!!! ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Nov 30th 2006 at 11:03:55 PM |
|
Name: |
AreOut |
Comments: |
OMB?! ![]() VC: VWYE NO YEAH, VW IS THE ****! |
![]() |
Viewing Page 3 of 53 (Total Entries: 5262) |