77 games = 17% = 18% ?

As a mathematician, this one amused me: I've played 440 online games, drawing 77 and losing 77. So how come I've drawn 17% but lost 18%? Come on chess.com. If you're going to fudge it to sum to a 100% please don't round up my losses 😏

2+2 = 5

Thats why

Of course!

Maybe it's just a matter of perspective.  Some gentleman wrote a fable, about two young, school aged fish swiming by an older, wiser fish.  This elder fish is infinitely old (infinitely wise?) blah blah blah...  but asks the young fish how the water is.  And the young fish were like,  what the fudge is water?  And it seemed straight ridiculous to them... but water is a thing.  Now,  legitimate fish,  fables aside, don't speak english, but if we asked them about water.  They probably wouldnt understand much about H20.  They kind of live in the water...they cant just step out and evaluate it without trillions upon trillions of other variables.  Any idea , of water from the fishies perspective, would be super dubious at best.  So we can say fish are probably oblivious to "Water" per se.  And if we can imagine sentient fish, we can imagine sentient points.  (geometric points, Ie single locations).    Well,  a point is an imaginary, conceptual, 0 dimensiona thing.   And maybe a sentient point would be as oblivious to its own "0 dimensional environment" as fish are to water.   That said, I think we, as people can percieve objects.  Our 3d monitors, the 2d text on our monitors etc.  So maybe a 1d  thing could percieve or at least conceptualize 0d but not 1d.  2d could conceptualize and or percieve 1d and 0d but never 2d. 3d could conceptualize and/ or percieve 2d , 1d and 0d but never 3d.  And so we as humans, who percieve 3d must be 4 dimensional things.   The combonation of up to 4 dimensions = our reality, but we can't percieve 4d so all our supposed knowledge,  all our perception is totally theoretical.  Maybe chess.com logic, that 77 games = 17%=18% is totally legit and we can't comprehend with our paltry, limited perspective *shrugs*

Great, chess.com has a new lunatic in the forums.  May they rest in peace.

*licks my thumb, smudges mutalblundersociety's makeup in the shape of a moon*    Lunacy is a myth.

It's a matter of order of operations. Computers are not capable of parellel processing like humans and this is a funny way that the specific way the programming programmed the math makes a difference.

FIRST: calculate number of wins:

286/440 = 65%

THEN: Calculate number of losses:

77/440 = 17.5 = 18%

THEN: Fill in the rest with number of draws.

100% - 65% - 18% = 17%

The programmer took a shortcut here and figured since they would add up to 100% the computer could fill it in, but didn't take into account that there are situations where this can come out strange- or did he?

He did take into account that this happens, but did it anyways, and I also know why he did this. He probably started with 3 steps "THEN: Calculate draws and add" But for your scenaro this would make:

65% wins

18% losses

18% draws

= 101%

It adds up to 101%

There is no way to avoid this except to make the computer fill in the remaning number of draws by subtracting from 100.

So this is what the programmer did. It is either this or the percentages add up to 101. You choose which makes more sense.

@xman720 Such a sterile answer.   Do you find a sense of security in very orderly things?

Sorry. I took my eye off my one solitary post. I'm not sure what the programmer coded but I do know that some days,like today, my w/d/l percentages don't sum to a 100%. The plot thickens.

The plot really does thicken. I just re checked my sums (after posting) on the app and it added to 100% but not on the website which Sums to 99%. So it's only the app developer who's fudging things. Nice analogy pretysusan!

The calculations just need to display more precision (more decimal points), then you have 65.0% wins, 17.5% losses, 17.5% draws.

The real question is: How have you won 65% of your games?

Teach me your ways, ye winning one!

Simple. By moving 'wood' around on the analysis board. For a disproportionate amount of 'own time'.

Ok so @xman720 nailed it with his analysis. But today's distribution takes the biscuit: 340/91/90 =521; %wise = 65/17/18. I sense a disturbance in the force!? I've lost fewer games than drawn but it's higher on a %basis. I note that the website now uses one do as per @turbofish es suggestion.