trading
Not sure why you are being downvoted, trading is very objective indeed.
Because success cannot be attributed to luck or skill, star traders could just be a result of survivorship bias, many are still unable to beat the market net of fees
Ask HN: What field has the most objective, quantitative evaluation of skill?
11–20 of 20 posts
Re: Ask HN: What field has the most objective, quantitative evaluation of skill?
#121-1 games with level playing fields.
Re: Ask HN: What field has the most objective, quantitative evaluation of skill?
#13A field does not evaluate skill. People do. People are subjective. Some skills permit more objective quantitative evaluation than others. Chess, in your example, looks like a skill we can objectively measure and rank, over a career of matches with scores kept. Even so we’re measuring a person’s performance in chess matches as a proxy for chess skill. A mediocre player might get lucky and catch Garry Kasparov on a day…
Yes obviously which is why OP is asking the question.
And you aren't right, there are many games where there are objective scores or measures of skill like other have said golf, darts, billiards. What leads to a field being more objective is the presence of scores which can be compared and serve as the goal, and the score outcome is not based on luck or opponent play.
Re: Ask HN: What field has the most objective, quantitative evaluation of skill?
#14Golf. You play 'against the course' under the exact same conditions as every other competitor to see who can get the lowest score over the course of a week. Shoot low scores week after week, win tournaments, receive a ranking. Pretty straightforward. Golf is unique among mass-market sports in that your performance is not subject to the effects of your opponents' play (other than psychologically). Nobody's blocking yo…
I guess the same could be said of bowling.
Or competitive shooting.
Re: Ask HN: What field has the most objective, quantitative evaluation of skill?
#15Re: Ask HN: What field has the most objective, quantitative evaluation of skill?
#16Measurement-based Olympic sports (100 meter dash, speed skating, high jump, etc.) The winner is not only determined by pure physical capacity, but is a result of all the skill in training and mental preparation before and during the event.
Re: Ask HN: What field has the most objective, quantitative evaluation of skill?
#17Golf. You play 'against the course' under the exact same conditions as every other competitor to see who can get the lowest score over the course of a week. Shoot low scores week after week, win tournaments, receive a ranking. Pretty straightforward. Golf is unique among mass-market sports in that your performance is not subject to the effects of your opponents' play (other than psychologically). Nobody's blocking yo…
Almost all sports from track & field where you measure performance in units is. Sprint, pole vault, long jump, high jump, javelin, discus
Re: Ask HN: What field has the most objective, quantitative evaluation of skill?
#18Juggling.
It isn't more objective than the "measured sports" mentioned in other comments, but it does have the advantage of its measures being mostly integers (eg. how many balls can you juggle? With one hand? Etc.), which means there is always a strict pass/fail test to "level up".
Re: Ask HN: What field has the most objective, quantitative evaluation of skill?
#19A field does not evaluate skill. People do. People are subjective. Some skills permit more objective quantitative evaluation than others. Chess, in your example, looks like a skill we can objectively measure and rank, over a career of matches with scores kept. Even so we’re measuring a person’s performance in chess matches as a proxy for chess skill. A mediocre player might get lucky and catch Garry Kasparov on a day…
Yes obviously which is why OP is asking the question. And you aren't right, there are many games where there are objective scores or measures of skill like other have said golf, darts, billiards. What leads to a field being more objective is the presence of scores which can be compared and serve as the goal, and the score outcome is not based on luck or opponent play.
Maybe not obviously, since this question gets asked in some form or another fairly often.
I used a game as an example of something that permits objective and quantitative scoring. Professional and technical fields don’t work like that. Chess and darts and tennis do.
Re: Ask HN: What field has the most objective, quantitative evaluation of skill?
#201-1 games with level playing fields.
You can imagine a rock paper scissors scenario where 3 players compete for the top spot but their differing styles make it difficult to objectively determine the best player. You need fields where the meta-game is tiny; hence why Golf, track & field etc. is the top response at the moment.