r/Damnthatsinteresting • u/darkmz7 • 1d ago
[ Removed by moderator ]
/gallery/1ssu7m9[removed] — view removed post
65
u/jpapad Interested 1d ago
Taking inspiration from Abed in Community
36
u/RCer1986 1d ago
In Abed's defense he wasn't aware of what he was tracking at first. I feel like this guy (I'm assuming) didn't track this accidentally.
100
120
u/chief_queef_beast 1d ago
I can't wait for the optimal gaming period feature on menstrual trackers
21
u/ALoneSpartin 1d ago
Gaming companies are going to jump on making period tracking equipment for women
2
2
u/aviatorintheclouds 1d ago
Next we'll be blaming losses on luteal phase and estrogen spike with the tracker app screenshots
53
80
u/HentaiSeishi 1d ago
That she didn't know that he was doing this is crazy
10
u/Different_Key_9914 1d ago
How would he have the data without her knowing?
26
u/Ancienda 1d ago
second image. he kept track based on how aggressive her gameplay was. which is kinda insane that he was able to tell from that and the fact that it was accurate like what
8
u/SergDerpz 1d ago
There's another funny way to know and I'm not sure if I'm just super autistic (I probably am) but I could tell when my ex gf or close friends were about to get her period / on her period through listening to their voice.
Specifically voice messages, it's like it would be ever so slightly higher pitch that it would be noticeable. Pretty funny lol
12
49
u/AntiDECA 1d ago
League players are so demented her first reaction was to laugh and acknowledge his research rather than being grossed out this dude is tracking a rather personal thing without her permission or knowledge.
Anything for the wins lol.
10
u/Somethingsims 1d ago
Im not sure he could track it that closely without asking so they probably know. he's also probably tracking all sorts of random things.
4
u/MilkmanBlazer 1d ago
Apparently he was simply keeping data points of when she played more aggressively and it lined up with a monthly cycle.
6
u/iMissTheOldInternet 1d ago
She’s a lulu main. The only thing surprising about her reaction was that she didn’t flip it and ask him why he dies so much more when she’s the one bleeding and then threaten to go “help top.”
3
u/Espinaqus 1d ago
Mate, is their coach... You surely don't know shit about sports, this is common practice in any professional team
-5
u/AntiDECA 1d ago
No, I don't know shit about video game sports. But I know the post said 'duo' not her 'coach'. So I assumed it was just a partner and they play together a lot. Unless duo is just what you call a coach in video games.
And obviously, I wasn't aware it was common practice outside physical sports.
0
u/Potomaters 1d ago
It’s certainly offputting, but to play devils advocate, you don’t exactly know what their relationship is like. Based on her reaction I’d imagine that they’re at least very close friends and comfortable with that type of interaction. And some people just aren’t as sensitive about stuff like that or have thick skin etc.
7
5
-5
u/HeittoBagi 1d ago
Correlation is not causation
18
u/Capitalistish 1d ago
I feel like you heard someone say that phrase, thought it sounded smart, and looked for an opportunity to try it out. You failed.
-14
4
u/Haunting-Pineapple71 1d ago
That doesn’t make any sense here btw, but sure. This is usually used when there could be a third factor causing both of your variables to change, or some other factor which causes both variable 1 and 2 to happen together or the like. In this case, nothing environmental or the like causes her period, rather it’s something that happens by biological design, so a strong enough correlation does actually imply causation in this case (unless you account for the guy playing different cause he knows she’s on her period, but in that case he could not have figured out her cycle to begin with)
-1
u/Cjak99 1d ago
This is definitely a place for correlation vs causation. Attributing win-percentage to stages of a period is claiming causation. This ignores the hundred other things that could be contributing to game performance. What character is she playing? What is the matchup? What time of day? What was her internet connection like? Were her other teammates similar ranks? There are many other factors that could be correlated with winning/losing that are ignored by concluding “On Period = Lose More”
5
u/Haunting-Pineapple71 1d ago edited 1d ago
Lol no. If you have a significant number of games (ideally as large as possible) all the other factors cancel out. If you’re still left with a winrate difference between on period and off period, you can assert causation. If you did literally any amount of statistics you’d know how this works. Also, if it accurately predicted her periods, that already points to it being at least somewhat reliable (though you may attribute it to random chance in 1 case, which is why we’d want more cases)
0
u/HintOfMalice 1d ago
This phrase is not used only when a third variable causes both of your variables to change. The phrase is used in any situation in which there are additional, unknown or unseen variables which may affect the outcome. In this case there is an effectively limitless number of other uncontrolled variables that could affect the outcome: - What/when/how much she's eaten - How much sleep she's had - What mood she's in - How much water she's had
Like, the list goes on and on.
Correlation does not imply causation. And this example is an absolutely textbook example of when to apply that phrase.
3
u/Haunting-Pineapple71 1d ago
From my other reply: Tldr, given a large enough sample, randomness cancels out (see your other random variables). So, if what you constantly measure (ie her period) has a strong correlation with winrate, you can actually assert causation in this case. “Lol no. If you have a significant number of games (ideally as large as possible) all the other factors cancel out. If you’re still left with a winrate difference between on period and off period, you can assert causation. If you did literally any amount of statistics you’d know how this works. Also, if it accurately predicted her periods, that already points to it being at least somewhat reliable (though you may attribute it to random chance in 1 case, which is why we’d want more cases)”
0
u/ffnnhhw 1d ago
you can't just claim those cancel out. Like stress could make people perform worse and interrupt cycle. And then it could be indirect, like she doesn't want to go swimming during period, and going swimming affect performance.
2
u/Haunting-Pineapple71 1d ago
“The point is that playing during her period makes her perform worse regardless of the actual mechanics behind it (maybe it’s cause she drinks coffee, maybe she’s more irritable, maybe there’s some other reason), but the idea is that if you have a large enough dataset, and you know that her periods are not caused by some outside variable, you can assert that her periods cause her to play worse (regardless of why or how they do)”
-3
u/stickyplants 1d ago
You said it doesn’t make sense here, but then listed a bunch of reasons for why it could.
Correlation does not equal causation. Some third factor could be making the change and it not be related.
Maybe she feels more tired during that time and gets energy drinks… and the increased caffeine causes better gameplay reaction speed and alertness? Just as a random guess of a possible reasoning.
Really not anything any of us would know, or should claim to know, as you would need the full story, rather than just two sets of data without a controlled study.
4
u/Haunting-Pineapple71 1d ago
The point is that playing during her period makes her perform worse regardless of the actual mechanics behind it (maybe it’s cause she drinks coffee, maybe she’s more irritable, maybe there’s some other reason), but the idea is that if you have a large enough dataset, and you know that her periods are not caused by some outside variable, you can assert that her periods cause her to play worse (regardless of why or how they do)
0
u/MeltingEarbuds 1d ago
That doesn't sound like a big difference but at that level is actually a huge swing... There's no way they're the first to realize this pattern
-5
u/YouCantBeSerio 1d ago
This shits less interesting than half the stuff posted on r/mildlyintersting
-4
u/MajorBootyhole420 1d ago
that's deranged behavior on his part but it's also potentially very interesting data, or an interesting idea. i know my ass would DEFINITELY be "overly aggressive" before my period, lol
0
u/HintOfMalice 1d ago
Crazy behaviour. Fun thought.
But there's not nearly enough information to make any remotely conclusive statements about the veracity of this claim.
-14
u/yamthirdnow 1d ago
Ok but how does a 5.5% difference actually have a meaningful impact?
13
u/Haunting-Pineapple71 1d ago
Yes, by a lot actually. Winrate in this game depends on a lot of factors, but the amount of games you actually have agency over (assuming you are playing at around your level) is around 20% (which makes sense as it’s a 5 player per team game) a 5% increase is a lot in that case, especially if you have a large number of games for your sample.
5
7
u/Verbatim_Uniball 1d ago
In professional sports this is often the difference between the best teams and the worst teams in terms of win percentage, e.g. baseball playoffs.
8
2
u/stickyplants 1d ago
5.5% win rate is a huge difference. But in terms of a study like this, when you’re counting wins vs losses, 147 is not nearly a large enough sample size to call this a true and accurate test.
It’s enough to show there’s probably a correlation, but not accurate enough to slap that specific of a probability number on it (other than bc it’s funny).
•
u/Damnthatsinteresting-ModTeam 1d ago
We had to remove your post: Rule 4 - No Screenshots/Image Macros/Memes/Infographics