Chuck Sperry News

[fallstaff]

0/6 — I blame myself

[lsmith55]

fml winning those dumb cards killed my chance of ever scoring lol - i think i just need to make a EQL for my 10yo son

There is hope- I also got the cards but hit on a reg today.

[KSUvet]

0/4. I blame fallstaff.

[ygolohcysp]

fml winning those dumb cards killed my chance of ever scoring lol - i think i just need to make a EQL for my 10yo son

There is hope- I also got the cards but hit on a reg today.

According to their faq you have the same chance on every drop, it's just that other people may get in front of you with their long string of misses.

[bsharp]

fml winning those dumb cards killed my chance of ever scoring lol - i think i just need to make a EQL for my 10yo son

There is hope- I also got the cards but hit on a reg today.

According to their faq you have the same chance on every drop, it's just that other people may get in front of you with their long string of misses.

[toobs]

fml winning those dumb cards killed my chance of ever scoring lol - i think i just need to make a EQL for my 10yo son

There is hope- I also got the cards but hit on a reg today.

[KipPotapych]

I could be completely wrong on this, but this is likely how it works (how other similar systems not related to this hobby work). Every time you enter a draw and is unsuccessful, you get a point, call it a priority. The more you enter and don’t score, the higher your priority. Once you hit a drop, your priority goes back to zero (or even negative, because you know - fair) and you start building your priority again. On the other end of this process, they have x prints to be allocated. Out of x, 1/3x is allocated to people with priority say 5 and higher; 1/4x to priority 4 and higher; another 1/5x to priority 3 and higher; and so on. Only, say, 10% of the run is for those with zero points or more. If negative priority is involved upon scoring, then, perhaps, another 5% (or rather this 5% is half of the 10 already mentioned) of the run is allocated to those people, as well as anybody else. Could also be that if hit a drop, you get a minus 1 and non are allocated for you next time, so you simply enter the draw for the sake of getting a point to come back to 0. If you hit another drop (tour second score) at some point, you get -2, so you would have “sit through” but enter another two draws in order to have a chance again. This negative scenario is unlikely, but with the “fair” being mentioned all over is plausible.

Of course, the numbers are completely arbitrary and there is way more complex breakdown starting with gazillion points, etc.

In other words, the more “silver linings” one has, the higher one’s probability of getting a print, but it is probably never really a zero, unless that negative scenario is reality, then it could be on some drops.

Is it fair? Not really, in my view, but it is more fair than a simple lottery, especially where some run is allocated to certain people who are “on good terms” with organizers.

This way Chuck doesn’t have to deal with whiners or answer any questions at all (though I don’t believe he had to prior). Even questions in relation to who printed the DMB print (dodgers, we are all counting on you for a few decent pics!).

[jojobadass]

it's just nice to see everyone so happy

[lebantz]

After you win...

[ygolohcysp]

I could be completely wrong on this, but this is likely how it works (how other similar systems not related to this hobby work). Every time you enter a draw and is unsuccessful, you get a point, call it a priority. The more you enter and don’t score, the higher your priority. Once you hit a drop, your priority goes back to zero (or even negative, because you know - fair) and you start building your priority again. On the other end of this process, they have x prints to be allocated. Out of x, 1/3x is allocated to people with priority say 5 and higher; 1/4x to priority 4 and higher; another 1/5x to priority 3 and higher; and so on. Only, say, 10% of the run is for those with zero points or more. If negative priority is involved upon scoring, then, perhaps, another 5% (or rather this 5% is half of the 10 already mentioned) of the run is allocated to those people, as well as anybody else. Could also be that if hit a drop, you get a minus 1 and non are allocated for you next time, so you simply enter the draw for the sake of getting a point to come back to 0. If you hit another drop (tour second score) at some point, you get -2, so you would have “sit through” but enter another two draws in order to have a chance again. This negative scenario is unlikely, but with the “fair” being mentioned all over is plausible.

Of course, the numbers are completely arbitrary and there is way more complex breakdown starting with gazillion points, etc.

In other words, the more “silver linings” one has, the higher one’s probability of getting a print, but it is probably never really a zero, unless that negative scenario is reality, then it could be on some drops.

Is it fair? Not really, in my view, but it is more fair than a simple lottery, especially where some run is allocated to certain people who are “on good terms” with organizers.

This way Chuck doesn’t have to deal with whiners or answer any questions at all (though I don’t believe he had to prior). Even questions in relation to who printed the DMB print (dodgers, we are all counting on you for a few decent pics!).

Bruh, read the EQL FAQ, you're kiiiiiinda in the right realm but there's no negative for scoring, you still get a random number every time just like everyone else.

[KipPotapych]

Bruh, read the EQL FAQ, you're kiiiiiinda in the right realm but there's no negative for scoring, you still get a random number every time just like everyone else.

Looked briefly a while back. Didn’t see anything describing exactly how it works in terms of “fair” chances, etc. Hence the “negative” was just a plausible assumption and not probable.

[ygolohcysp]

Bruh, read the EQL FAQ, you're kiiiiiinda in the right realm but there's no negative for scoring, you still get a random number every time just like everyone else.

Looked briefly a while back. Didn’t see anything describing exactly how it works in terms of “fair” chances, etc. Hence the “negative” was just a plausible assumption and not probable.

Ok maybe it wasn't their FAQ, it was this blog post they made:

https://www.eql.com/media/how-the-eqlizer-score-works

I still like the old way of course, but it's nice to see the explanation that reveals you're not getting dinged for getting picked

And again, I'm also salty that I didn't think of it . I'd sell the fudge out of this if it was mine

[KipPotapych]

^ Thanks for the link. So the system I described is actually somewhat better in terms of fairness, lol, but more complex to implement.

[Codeblue]

AI Sperry + EQL for President 2024. MAFA!

[KipPotapych]

Luls. Wouldn’t be a bad option though the way things are shaping up.

I just want to know who printed the damn DMB prints!