Challenge Series #7: Avoid the Single (TGM1)

Thread in 'Competition' started by JBroms, 19 May 2018.

    Ends: June 25th, 2018
    Hello again! I decided to resurrect an old TC challenge this time around, and I think this a fitting topic for a month-long challenge. There will also be an additional way to approach this challenge.

    First off, there will be a leaderboard ranked by the number of singles. With over a month to do it, we may see another perfect score!

    Additionally, there will be a second leaderboard ranked by the percentage of the singles in your PB. If your PB had 20 singles, and you played a game with 15, you will be at 75%. If you got it down to zero, you'll be at the top of the leaderboard with 0%.
    Given that this one will be a little more involved, @Muf will grant a custom forum title to the winner.

    I decided on this topic because I believe in the importance of analyzing your gameplay. As shown in the Analyze Videos of your Gameplay thread, taking some time to analyze your PB can be very eye-opening, and I would like to encourage more people to do it.

    For obvious reasons, only completed games are acceptable. To enter the percentage competition, please do an analysis of your PB. If you did not record your PB, runs within 15 seconds of your PB will be accepted. The number of singles is the only real requirement, but I encourage you to look at section spreads and level stop times too.
    Last edited: 22 May 2018
    Qlex, Kitaru and EnchantressOfNumbers like this.
  2. I think I don't have a video of my PB, but have video of my previous PB that I recorded at Pier21 (only several seconds difference); would that be eligible for this competition?
  3. Yeah, that's fine. I'm going to edit the original post to account for this issue.
  4. Are emulators or remakes like Texmaster allowed?
  5. Absolutely!
  6. Submission of prior recording within margin of PB:

    EDIT: I updated the spreadsheet based on definitions that @aperturegrillz and I discussed and agreed upon -- specifically, level stop is considered to start after lock flash of the piece after which the level counter will be unable to increment. Or, in other words, level stop includes the time of the first wasted entry delay period up until the line clear level increment that enters a new section. Previously, I had incorrectly counted the active time of the first piece that increments up to the boundary of the level stop (i.e., counter shows x99 or 998) and was unduly penalizing myself for instances where lines were immediately cleared with that piece without any level increments actually being "stopped."
    Last edited: 24 May 2018
    Archina likes this.
  7. K


    i just used the same format as Kitaru for my new PB :

    there is a mistake in your last line stats (0-999) : you are summing only from row 4 to 8.
    Last edited: 24 May 2018
  8. @Kitaru, K:
    The sum of the avg line/clear column does note make to much sense because the line clear per section is not constant.

    @JBroms: How about allowing 500 level games with the first half of the statistics in the ranking to broaden the competition a bit. Just rank them below every 999 game.
  9. Fair, I didn't even really review the summations in the last rows, I just dragged the handle across. That would be a column where a total is not sensible or necessary.
  10. I did a 75, because its the only game i finished. I had some promising ones with less then 20 in the first half, but died in second half.

  11. COL


    I haven't played in ages but maybe I'd try this (since tex is OK). This is something I've practiced in the past.
  12. COL



    most of singles has been made between 400 and 460 because of some blunders I made, I tried to fix the stack and go on anyways.


    It is the game #366 in the tex file on my signature if you're curious.

    level singles doubles triples tetrises
    0 0 1 2 4
    100 1 3 2 4
    200 1 3 0 6
    300 1 5 0 4
    400 9 5 2 1 (stacking mess up)
    500 0 4 1 5 (time lost to massive level stop)
    600 0 1 0 7 (idem)
    700 0 1 0 7 (idem)
    800 0 1 2 5 (idem)
    900 0 5 3 2 (stacking mistakes here too)
    total 13 29 12 45 (99 clears)

    In my PB on tex (9:31) I have 14 singles and 98 clears (92.86%)

    This challenge is difficult because of the conflicting goals: you're suppose to survive and
    sometimes singles are unavoidable. Plus in certain cases it is better to do a single than avoiding it and let the stack destroys itself to the point that you need a lot more singles later in order to fix it. In general single avoidance should be (imho) a possibility you get as a byproduct of your clean play rather than something you push aggressively for.

    I know Jago is able to pull off zero single games right? There is 4 days remaining. B)
  13. I've never been one to let deadlines stop me. My new record from this week had 63/146 = 43% singles. I'm treating this challenge as a new training category, just like going for max Tetrises in TAP 20G. Neither of those challenges should die. They're invaluable training tools.
    Qlex likes this.

Share This Page