Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

95%-ile isn't that good (2020)

danluu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 191 posts

Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)

#121

Post by ch4s3 »

ndriscoll wrote: post #86
ch4s3 wrote: post #66

I don't think I agree with this at all. I can see how you would have this impression with something like a video game or I guess public speaking where maybe a lot of people do it un-seriously and you can be better than most with some intentional effort. It's weird to choose a super mass market game like Overwatch to make that point though, if you were in the 95th percentile of Starcraft players, that would truly be s…

I'm not sure what the 352 is supposed to be. strengthlevel.com claims a 352 lb bench is ~95th percentile for a 180 lb male, but I've never seen anyone in a gym that can bench anywhere near that. IME even a 225 lb squat feels like 95th percentile. I don't think I've ever seen someone else do a 100 lb shoulder press (~20th percentile on SL). Usually I see something like 75 lb (doing fixed barbells), and once I saw 95 l…

> claims a 352 lb bench is ~95th percentile for a 180 lb male

Surely you mean 353lb dead lift.

Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)

#122

Post by jeremyjh »

qsort wrote: post #116
netcan wrote: post #75

I'm 70%-ile online chess player. That is average relative to players active on lichess in a given month. I'm better than most people (maybe top 10% even) that "play a little." I'm (I assume) well below average for adult tournament player. The pool matters. I think if I took lessons and dedicated a serious 100-200 hrs over some period, I might reach 85th in my online pool. 95%-ile is currently ELO 2075... just under w…

Lichess is an incredible project and a true gem of open source, but an accurate source of ELO rating it is not. As we speak I am rated 2227. I am unspeakably horrendous at chess. Online chess is more like a video game; my competitive mindset and nerdy minimax tendencies are single-handedly carrying me.

It has a very accurate rating system, but "accuracy" does not mean "matches FIDE". Ratings can only be compared within the same pool of players, and Lichess is quite good at matching you with people of comparable skill, which is the only purpose of a rating system.

Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)

#123

Post by tptacek »

gnicholas wrote: post #120
pvg wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The view has been taken at sufficient zoom levels to have multiple specific guidelines and dozens of moderator comments. It's just not the case that nobody has thought about this much or discussed it on HN repeatedly. As to 'valuable service', what the HN moderators ask in their own guidelines regarding feedback is very likely a better indication of value than 'IYO'.

As explained above, none of the guidelines actually addresses this type of comment. Also, it's obviously not just IMO, since as I mentioned other people have flagged the post, presumably after being educated by this comment.

It's fine. If you care, pay attention to how things like this go in the future, and I think it'll rapidly become clear to you what the norms are. If you really care, do what obsessives do, and follow Dan's comments, which are an informal mod-log for the site. We don't have to keep talking about this.

Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)

#124

Post by ndriscoll »

ch4s3 wrote: post #121
ndriscoll wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what the 352 is supposed to be. strengthlevel.com claims a 352 lb bench is ~95th percentile for a 180 lb male, but I've never seen anyone in a gym that can bench anywhere near that. IME even a 225 lb squat feels like 95th percentile. I don't think I've ever seen someone else do a 100 lb shoulder press (~20th percentile on SL). Usually I see something like 75 lb (doing fixed barbells), and once I saw 95 l…

> claims a 352 lb bench is ~95th percentile for a 180 lb male Surely you mean 353lb dead lift.

That's kind of the point: people online will say that's the 95 %ile level[0], and either they're taking the piss or they're self-selecting into a group that actually tries, so it's the 95 %ile of the 95%ile, or the 99.75 %ile. Meanwhile your average gymgoer that sometimes wanders into the free weight room thinks putting the big plates on the bar (i.e. 135) is a lot. There's obviously no way 1 in 20 dudes at the gym have a ~350 bench.

[0] https://strengthlevel.com/strength-standards/bench-press

Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)

#125

Post by ch4s3 »

bitexploder wrote: post #98
ndriscoll wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what the 352 is supposed to be. strengthlevel.com claims a 352 lb bench is ~95th percentile for a 180 lb male, but I've never seen anyone in a gym that can bench anywhere near that. IME even a 225 lb squat feels like 95th percentile. I don't think I've ever seen someone else do a 100 lb shoulder press (~20th percentile on SL). Usually I see something like 75 lb (doing fixed barbells), and once I saw 95 l…

I can squat 315, DL 425, bench about 230. Done 100-115 strict overhead press. I train Brazilian Jiu Jitsu. Plenty of guys stronger than me that I train with. I also go to a gym once in a while. I am solidly middle of the pack, especially considering I weigh 200 lbs. maybe if you are at planet fitness or something. Otherwise these numbers only take a bit of dedicated work to achieve. You would not look at me and think…

> Otherwise these numbers only take a bit of dedicated work to achieve

I think you may be underselling that a bit. I got to something like 370-80lb DL while weighing 185 some years ago, and it took nearly 3 years of dedicated work, eating tons of boring chicken, and a lot of lifestyle changes. It was pretty hard work and a of hours in total. I still lift weights, but don't have the focus and dedication to maintain that kind of lifting routine. Even at my max I was probably only edging into the "advanced" category.

Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)

#127

Post by 6gvONxR4sf7o »

The argument seems like a cheat, because it rules out people who don't participate, but doesn't limit itself to people who practice regularly.

For video games, an analogy could be limiting to people who bought the game on steam, but not limiting to people who ever installed and played it.

Or maybe a better analogy is website users, limiting to people who visited, but still including all the people who immediately bounced/closed the tab.

Like, if you take basketball, I'd bet a lot of people here have shot a basketball, but don't practice regularly. The last time I held a basketball was probably 20 years ago, so should I still count?

The point is that participation itself is too much of a spectrum, so the 95%ile statement is just 'most participants basically don't really participate, and there's a long tail of participation.' Which isn't super worthwhile. If you limit to people who "regularly practice" a thing, this would be an interesting argument, but it also wouldn't be true then.

Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)

#128

Post by NineStarPoint »

ch4s3 wrote: post #66

I don't think I agree with this at all. I can see how you would have this impression with something like a video game or I guess public speaking where maybe a lot of people do it un-seriously and you can be better than most with some intentional effort. It's weird to choose a super mass market game like Overwatch to make that point though, if you were in the 95th percentile of Starcraft players, that would truly be s…

It doesn’t matter how high the skill ceiling is, just how much effort the average player puts into the game. In Starcraft 2 to be top 4% player essentially means to be the worst player in masters league. But the gap in skill between a bad masters player and a grandmaster player (or even larger, a pro player) is enormous. I know that when I played I was able to climb to near the top of diamond without even using map hot keys, and still being (compared to high masters players) really quite mediocre at macro. It doesn’t really matter how high the skill ceiling is when you can approach the 95th percentile while not even utilizing all the functionality the game gives you.

Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)

#129

Post by empath-nirvana »

ch4s3 wrote: post #66

I don't think I agree with this at all. I can see how you would have this impression with something like a video game or I guess public speaking where maybe a lot of people do it un-seriously and you can be better than most with some intentional effort. It's weird to choose a super mass market game like Overwatch to make that point though, if you were in the 95th percentile of Starcraft players, that would truly be s…

> if you were in the 95th percentile of Starcraft players, that would truly be something, since the skill ceiling is MILES high.

If you made it near the top of diamond in Starcraft 2, that's probably top 5%, and that's still _miles_ away from where the pro players are. I made it near the top of diamond at some point after it came out and I was terrible at SC2.

Re: 95%-ile isn't that good (2020)

#130

Post by pvg »

gnicholas wrote: post #120
pvg wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The view has been taken at sufficient zoom levels to have multiple specific guidelines and dozens of moderator comments. It's just not the case that nobody has thought about this much or discussed it on HN repeatedly. As to 'valuable service', what the HN moderators ask in their own guidelines regarding feedback is very likely a better indication of value than 'IYO'.

As explained above, none of the guidelines actually addresses this type of comment. Also, it's obviously not just IMO, since as I mentioned other people have flagged the post, presumably after being educated by this comment.

none of the guidelines actually addresses this type of comment

They do. A significant chunk of the site guidelines boils down to 'no meta' and even address the specific kind of meta in the comments - meta about appropriateness of submissions and meta about the alleged misbehaviour of others.

The fact that it's not just your opinion doesn't change the fact that the mods have said this kind of commentary does not, in fact, provide value to them which was your claim.

But like tptacek says, just read/follow dang's comments, almost everything gets recycled through there on a regular basis.

Post reply on HN