If you see a User Interface like the following, how can you be sure about the result? Is the result "Moderate"? Or is the result "Strong"?
A better User Interface would be something like this:
Sunday, July 26, 2015
An Example of Bad User Interface Design
If you see a User Interface like the following, how can you be sure about the result? Is the result "Moderate"? Or is the result "Strong"?
A better User Interface would be something like this:
Tuesday, March 17, 2015
Some of the Most Memorable Sports Moments
Joe Montana’s pass against Dallas Cowboys in the January 10, 1982, NFC Championship Game.
Djokovic’s forehand return of Federer’s serve at US Open
semi-final in 2011, on Federer’s match point.
Maradona dribbled past half of the English soccer team, and
scored a goal, in the 1986 World Cup.
Wednesday, August 6, 2014
Wednesday, July 16, 2014
Top 4 Soccer Leagues
Top 4 Soccer Leagues
Spanish
Spanish
- Real Madrid
- Barcelona Barca
- Manchester United
- Arsenal (London)
- Chelsea (London)
- Manchester City
- Liverpool
- Bayern Munich
- AC Milan
- Juventus (Turin)
Monday, January 20, 2014
Comparing Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal
People have been debating if Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal is
the greatest tennis player of all time.
Some people think Federer is the best. But other people ask:
If Federer is the best, and Nadal is better than Federer, would that make Nadal
the best?
So, between Federer and Nadal, who is better?
I will use a method that I think is fair: to compare their
head-to-head record during their prime.
I define Federer’s prime as the period from 2003 Wimbledon to
2010 Australian Open.
I define Nadal’s prime as the period from 2005 French Open to
the time beyond Federer’s prime.
So, their primes overlap from 2005 French Open to 2010
Australian Open. Let’s look at their records during this period.
During this period, Federer and Nadal met 18 times. The record is as follows:
Federer
|
Nadal
|
|
Total
|
6
|
12
|
Clay
|
2
|
9
|
Grass
|
2
|
1
|
Hard Court
|
2
|
2
|
The conclusion: Nadal is better on clay. Federer is better on
grass. They are even on hard court.
Other conclusions: Federer was more consistent on clay than
Nadal was on grass and hard court. Federer reached more clay tournament finals
than Nadal reached grass or hard court finals.
Other aspects:
Talent: Federer is more talented.
Mental strength: Nadal is mentally stronger.
Endurance during a match: They are equal.
Durability during a season: Federer was more durable in a
season.
Sunday, January 19, 2014
Scoring Systems in Sports and Politics
“Simpson’s Paradox” is a statistical quirk in that one side
wins more points yet loses the contest.
1) Basketball
There are 2 levels:
Points-->Game
Whoever wins most points wins the game.
“Simpson’s Paradox” is not possible.
2) Soccer
There are 2 levels:
Points-->Game
Whoever wins most points wins the game.
“Simpson’s Paradox” is not possible.
3) Volleyball
There are 3 levels:
Points-->Set-->Match
Whoever wins most points wins the set.
Whoever wins most sets wins the match.
“Simpson’s Paradox” is possible.
Example: A vs B: 25:0, 25:0, 23:25, 23:25, 13:15.
A got 103 points, B got 65 points, yet B won the match.
4) Baseball
There are 2 levels:
Runs ->Game
Whoever wins most runs wins the game.
“Simpson’s Paradox” is not possible.
5) American
Football
There are 2 levels:
Points-->Game
Whoever wins most points wins the game.
“Simpson’s Paradox” is not possible.
6) Tennis
There are 4 levels:
Points-->Game-->Set-->Match
Whoever wins most points wins the game.
Whoever wins most games wins the set.
Whoever wins most sets wins the match.
“Simpson’s Paradox” is possible.
Example: A vs B: 6:0, 4:6, 4:6.
A won 14 games, B won 12 games, yet B won the match.
7) Badminton
There are 3 levels:
Points->Set->Match
Whoever wins most points wins the set.
Whoever wins most sets wins the match.
“Simpson’s Paradox” is possible.
Example: A vs B: 21:0, 19:21, 19:21.
A won 59 points, B won 42 points, yet B won the match.
8) Ping pong
There are 3 levels:
Points->Set->Match
Whoever wins most points wins the set.
Whoever wins most sets wins the match.
“Simpson’s Paradox” is not possible.
Example: A vs B: 21:0, 19:21, 19:21.
A won 59 points, B won 42 points, yet B won the match.
9) American
Election
There are 3 levels:
Individual votes->Electoral College votes->Presidency
Whoever wins most Individual votes wins the Electoral College
votes in the state.
Whoever wins most Electoral College votes wins the
presidency.
“Simpson’s Paradox” is possible.
Example:
State A
|
State B
|
State C
|
Total
|
|
John # votes
|
100M
|
49M
|
49M
|
198M
|
John EC
votes
|
10
|
0
|
0
|
10
|
Mike # votes
|
0M
|
51M
|
51M
|
102M
|
Mike EC
votes
|
0
|
10
|
10
|
20
|
John won 198 million individual votes, Mike won 102 million
individual votes, yet Mike won the presidency.
10) French Election
There are 2 levels:
Individual votes->Presidency
Whoever wins most Individual votes wins the Presidency.
“Simpson’s Paradox” is not possible.
Friday, January 10, 2014
Chinese and Russian Movies
Many Chinese and Russian movies share some characteristics which I don't like.
Often, some characters are in a hysteric and half crazed state. They seem to be in a trance. Some performing artists may think that this is the highest stlevel of acting. Maybe so. But I, as an audience, feel tense and uncomfortable when I watch this kind of performance.
Furthermore, in some Chinese movies, many characters do some unreasonable and extraordinary things. For example, in Feng Xiaogang's movie "1942", a refugee fleeing from famine refuses to trade a toy for food, and risks death by cursing a Japanese soldier when he burned the toy. Maybe the director or the script writer think only unreasonable and extraordinary actions are worthy to be in a movie. Maybe their thinking is "Who would go to a movie theater to see reasonable and mundane stuff?" I don't know why, but in all the movies that I like, all characters behaved reasonably. Even in Feng Xiaogang's own movie "If You Are The One" , all characters behaved reasonably, and it is a much better movie than "1942".
Many Chinese and Russian movies have a half-witted character. They always say some stupid things to let the protagonist correct them and make the audience feel the protagonist is extra smart. But in real life, it is really hard to find such half-witted person.
Further more, some Chinese and Hong Kong movies have a funny character who often makes funny facial expressions. This is often not very funny. I like comedies in which the thinking and actions are funny, not the facial expressions. For example, George Costanza.
Often, some characters are in a hysteric and half crazed state. They seem to be in a trance. Some performing artists may think that this is the highest stlevel of acting. Maybe so. But I, as an audience, feel tense and uncomfortable when I watch this kind of performance.
Furthermore, in some Chinese movies, many characters do some unreasonable and extraordinary things. For example, in Feng Xiaogang's movie "1942", a refugee fleeing from famine refuses to trade a toy for food, and risks death by cursing a Japanese soldier when he burned the toy. Maybe the director or the script writer think only unreasonable and extraordinary actions are worthy to be in a movie. Maybe their thinking is "Who would go to a movie theater to see reasonable and mundane stuff?" I don't know why, but in all the movies that I like, all characters behaved reasonably. Even in Feng Xiaogang's own movie "If You Are The One" , all characters behaved reasonably, and it is a much better movie than "1942".
Many Chinese and Russian movies have a half-witted character. They always say some stupid things to let the protagonist correct them and make the audience feel the protagonist is extra smart. But in real life, it is really hard to find such half-witted person.
Further more, some Chinese and Hong Kong movies have a funny character who often makes funny facial expressions. This is often not very funny. I like comedies in which the thinking and actions are funny, not the facial expressions. For example, George Costanza.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)