Jay clarified the origin of the
message. I would like to add a few
things.
1) I disagree to separate top
Deadly+Hard+Medium solvers because:
a) the system could encourage
certain solvers to becoming very
"generous" with the ratings,
b) Donald needs new sofware to
create such list.
2) The purpose of my email message
was to share my finding, i.e. the
list of the top five GHS winners.
I played with my personally-
modified GHS-Print.exe to get the
list. Although I was familiar with
the initials that came up, I
posted the results.
As far as I could observe, the
solvers are enjoying the current
system of top 20 list.
Have fun.
Bye,
Suyono
Jay wrote:
message. I would like to add a few
things.
1) I disagree to separate top
Deadly+Hard+Medium solvers because:
a) the system could encourage
certain solvers to becoming very
"generous" with the ratings,
b) Donald needs new sofware to
create such list.
2) The purpose of my email message
was to share my finding, i.e. the
list of the top five GHS winners.
I played with my personally-
modified GHS-Print.exe to get the
list. Although I was familiar with
the initials that came up, I
posted the results.
As far as I could observe, the
solvers are enjoying the current
system of top 20 list.
Have fun.
Bye,
Suyono
Jay wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "chdvl" <w.a.de.vries@h...> wrote:
> > Does he/she want a list of the "elite"?
>
> I believe Suyono's post comes from an email conversation we had. I
> want to try to clarify that conversation.
>
> Suyono gave me a compliment of being a very good solver. However, I
> do not consider myself to be a very good solver, at least not compared
> to a number of others. I do not even consider myself to be a GHS
> Hunter. Last year I was more active with LaserTank. (This year I am
> more active with true Sokoban. But eventually I will get back into
> LaserTank.) I was in the number 1 position of the LaserTank Sokoban
> "top 20" list for a number of months and position 7 in the Challenge
> II list. But I felt guilty for being listed so high. I was there
> because of quantity, not quality. I would look at all of the levels
> that were unrated for each month and try to solve them. I do not have
> the creativity or patience that the true "very good solvers" have.
> Therefore, if I could not solve a level in a single computer session,
> I usually moved on. This means that most of what I solved would
> eventually be rated "Easy" (or "Kids"). I would try to get these
> solved levels submitted quickly so that the true "very good solvers"
> could skip them and concentrate on the levels that would eventually be
> rated medium, hard, or deadly.
>
> But there tended to be fewer of these other levels. So I was trying
> to find a way to give the recognition that these true "very good
> solvers" so justly deserved. My idea was to have a separate list that
> did not include the "Easy" and "Kids" levels. (It was slightly more
> complicated than this, in order to try to prevent cheating. But this
> was the basic idea.)
>
> Although Suyono's list is not the same (and so there might be some
> missing very good solvers), it is an excellent representation. These
> were many of the names I remember seeing on levels where I was
> especially amazed at seeing better solutions. Congratulations to all
> of you: aj, Al + AL, Amad, ccw, I&B, Ihab, Iron, jojo, masa, Mau.
> tere, Tina, VVI
> You are great examples of truly, very good solvers!
>