Using Math to Guarantee Victory in Competition?

So, the basic equation is V=BCxP-M

To explain it more in-depth: "V" is Victory (winning the game), "BC" is "best choice" (what the best option in terms of having the most positive outcome for the player AND his teammates), "P" is the players on the team, and "M" is mistakes (the mistakes players on the team commit).

Bet you didn't understand that, so below is a more in-depth explanation.

So, the more in-depth explanation is: in order to guarantee victory in a game, all the players constantly do what favors themselves AND their team the most without comitting mistakes. If they all do that constantly, without mistakes, victory could in theory be guaranteed.

Of course, winning would also be possible, even when comitting mistakes, but it would not be guaranteed.

So yeah, this is the really basic explanation, I'm working on something that can prove it's right. And I also don't think it will work in Yugioh, as it is a luckbased game, but I definitely think it could improve your chances!

Sorry if it's confusing, but I definitely want your feedback on what you think of the concept, or any flaws you see with it.

Zkillerthriller wrote:

So, the more in-depth explanation is: in order to guarantee victory in a game, all the players constantly do what favors themselves AND their team the most without comitting mistakes. If they all do that constantly, without mistakes, victory could in theory be guaranteed.

You just described being good at a game. Was an equation necessary? :l

Isn't that what math does? "David has 6 candies, his brother Jake eats 3 of them. How many candies does David have left?" That would be "6-3=?" in mathematical language.

Math doesn't explain that Jake is a dick.

Necruta wrote:

Math doesn't explain that Jake is a dick.

fucking jake.

you could sort of use it for ygo because its not totally luck based ;-;

DONT YOU DARE USE MAH NAME (David >:I) ESPECIALY NOT WITH SOMETHING INVOLVING MATH

Wow, that's really cool. I'll have to show that to my friends.

Also, who's Jake?

Zkillerthriller wrote:

Isn't that what math does? "David has 6 candies, his brother Jake eats 3 of them. How many candies does David have left?" That would be "6-3=?" in mathematical language.

The real question is how much Jake's ass ongoing to hurt when he takes that shit m8

I just David and Jake as example names. Could we drop that now and focus on the initial topic, please? xD

Idk i was just trying to be funny didn't work ;w;

Your topic sucks. Just saying. I want to see an actual example of how this can be applied.

Adele's Flip-Phone. wrote:

Your topic sucks. Just saying. I want to see an actual example of how this can be applied.

Any type of competition that isn't luck-based.

I'm talking about actual examples

With numbers

And actual theory behind it.

Adele's Flip-Phone. wrote:

I'm talking about actual examples

With numbers

And actual theory behind it.

Oh, like what?

That is, in fact, for you to come up with. I want to see how this theory can be applied in the practical. I want to see how you see your numbers to your advantage. I love statistics - yes - but I love numbers too. If this formula is about as flawed as I think it is - you should have flaws within your practical example.

Prove me wrong.

I don't even know if that's possible with numbers alone.

Then how exactly is your formula really able to be applied to real life scenarios? Formulas are meant to be used in the practical, not just kept as prized trophies to show off now and again. If you cannot determine the end result (V) all of the time with actual maths, then your formulae is flawed. You must be able to have a certain logic to your formula, you can't just waltz in with a, 'Hey guys! Look at my snazzy formula! It doesn't work, but I think it says something about how to win in literally only vigorous sports like Hocky and Football! Forget chess, because screw chess!"

Adele's Flip-Phone. wrote:

That is, in fact, for you to come up with. I want to see how this theory can be applied in the practical. I want to see how you see your numbers to your advantage. I love statistics - yes - but I love numbers too. If this formula is about as flawed as I think it is - you should have flaws within your practical example.

Prove me wrong.

Well, think about it: If every player on a team constantly do what favors themselves and their team the most, without comitting mistakes, how could they possible be beaten? Just requires logical thinking.

Adele's Flip-Phone. wrote:

Then how exactly is your formula really able to be applied to real life scenarios? Formulas are meant to be used in the practical, not just kept as prized trophies to show off now and again. If you cannot determine the end result (V) all of the time with actual maths, then your formulae is flawed. You must be able to have a certain logic to your formula, you can't just waltz in with a, 'Hey guys! Look at my snazzy formula! It doesn't work, but I think it says something about how to win in literally only vigorous sports like Hocky and Football! Forget chess, because screw chess!"

Yeah, I know it's flawed, which is why I'm still working on it, and I even said so in the topic.

No, no. A formula must be able to apply to real mathematical terms. Unless you can actually use your formulae in real life mathematical situations, it is flawed asf. For example:

Wd = F x D. That's a really easy formula. It can be applied to real scenarios, so it is proper formulae.

The colour of rainbows = my mother's current mood + sexual tension in the room * 10. Now, that can't be a real formula because some of the listings to make 'the colour of rainbows' can either not be calculated OR do not even use mathematical terms. It isn't a real formula as well due to the other fact that you cannot determine the colour of rainbows based on these factors. Your forumula resembles this formula. It's flawed because it can never be used in real life scenarios.

Adele's Flip-Phone. wrote:

No, no. A formula must be able to apply to real mathematical terms. Unless you can actually use your formulae in real life mathematical situations, it is flawed asf. For example:

Wd = F x D. That's a really easy formula. It can be applied to real scenarios, so it is proper formulae.

The colour of rainbows = my mother's current mood + sexual tension in the room * 10. Now, that can't be a real formula because some of the listings to make 'the colour of rainbows' can either not be calculated OR do not even use mathematical terms. It isn't a real formula as well due to the other fact that you cannot determine the colour of rainbows based on these factors. Your forumula resembles this formula. It's flawed because it can never be used in real life scenarios.

What do you mean it can't? Of course it can be applied to real-life scenarios. Say you're a football team playing against another football team. If you follow the formula your team will get the best possible outcome of the match.

Zkillerthriller wrote:

What do you mean it can't? Of course it can be applied to real-life scenarios. Say you're a football team playing against another football team. If you follow the formula your team will get the best possible outcome of the match.

It doesn't have to be. What if your opponent uses sub-optimal plays but those result in all your players getting injured which then leads to weaker best choices because those players are benched and benched players are most of the time if not all of the time not your best players causing your best choices to become less good than normal which can still lead to a loss to your team and not to victory.

this is the single most retarded thing ive seen this entire year

only been a week but i digress

you seem like some 13 year old who just recently learned in pre-algebra that you can use letters in math

Adele's Flip-Phone. wrote:

No, no. A formula must be able to apply to real mathematical terms. Unless you can actually use your formulae in real life mathematical situations, it is flawed asf. For example:

Wd = F x D. That's a really easy formula. It can be applied to real scenarios, so it is proper formulae.

The colour of rainbows = my mother's current mood + sexual tension in the room * 10. Now, that can't be a real formula because some of the listings to make 'the colour of rainbows' can either not be calculated OR do not even use mathematical terms. It isn't a real formula as well due to the other fact that you cannot determine the colour of rainbows based on these factors. Your forumula resembles this formula. It's flawed because it can never be used in real life scenarios.

. So at least 9010 because the sexual tension in the room is over 9000!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!