The reason why "never retry" is (probably) bad advice

posted
Total Posts
21
show more
ManuelOsuPlayer
Hitcount dosn't mean nothing.
Player who plays longer maps have more hitcount. And that dosn't mean they retry less.

In my personal case i can't retry without getting worst.
Topic Starter
Railey2

Pawnables wrote:

Good god the detail is strong with this one.
Make a tl;dr pls.
gladly

It has been claimed by many that retrying a lot hurts your improvement.

After carefully looking at some data, I concluded that this claim is unfounded. The data I used are the top10k players, I plotted (pp/hitcount) against (hitcount/playcount) to approximate a rate of improvement and a retry-rate, then checked if improvement increases or decreases the more people retry.
Turns out it doesn't. More details in full version.


ManuelOsuPlayer wrote:

Hitcount dosn't mean nothing.
Player who plays longer maps have more hitcount. And that dosn't mean they retry less.

In my personal case i can't retry without getting worst.
(hitcount/playcount) describes hits per play. It doesn't perfectly align with retry-rate because it is influenced by the players map-choices, I'm aware of that.
That doesn't mean that it's a useless variable, though. As I said before, while not being a perfect measure for it, it still approximates retry-rate. As you can see, Rohulk has the highest value. Players like Rafis have low values.
It's not perfect, but it's also not useless, there is clearly a positive correlation between hits per play and retry-rate.


Another nice thing about statistics: If you have inaccuracies, (like your values are always off by a certain margin in both directions), then that will not matter for the final analysis as long as have enough data to work with. According to probability theory, the inaccuracies will simply cancel out.

It's only problematic if your inaccuracies point in only one direction systematically, which shouldn't really be the case here. Not with the (hitcount/playcount)-variable, at least. The other one is far more difficult.
ManuelOsuPlayer
Retry less isn't bad advice.
I think players who retry more, force themselfs more than usually players what dosn't retry. Because you usually don't retry when you don't care a lot, or the map it's to easy to play what you do it perfectly fine, or hard enought to don't think about a fc be possible for you. So you don't push yourself.
Meanwhile retrying 200 times, you're searching for a good score each time. So you try to improve more than a non retry player.

In my opinion it's 100% a mental thing. Some players retrying, play worst and worst because they lose energy and focus as more they try at that moment, making them play worst and get bad habits.
Meanwhile other players with other mentality get more closer each try. And one try more means more chances to reach the goal, new knowledge, more improvment. Getting closer each try.

Maybe non retry players mentality put all the motivation and energy at first attemps. And retry players get more energy and more focused as more they keep trying on the map until get it.

2 years ago i was a retry player, searching for ranks like crazy. I was improving my plays. I had like 30-50 maps and i only was playing those over and over until get the fc. After long long time trying one day suddently i started improving. Sadly my pc broke and couldn't play anymore.

After a months break i back from play as a 50k player to be a 200k player in skill. Somehow i understand i was not enjoying the game, so i stop retry and start improving until now.
A few days back i started retrying on a goal to improve and trying to get higher ranks each day. I quick start getting really consistenly getting FC at 1-7 retry at some 5* maps.
After a week doing it i was totally unable to play 4* maps what i could consistenly fc at first try consistenly. My acc drop, my combo drop, my stamina drop, and became totally unable to fc maps what i did fc easy days ago.

Also starting get a problem what i never had before. If i get a miss i'm actually unable to hit any circle after the miss and instanly die at the map.

Seems like a big mental wall due to retry over and over.

There is something around there where you can retry and get way better than when you don't do it. But at same time If you retry you can lose skills.

Maybe one days you can retry all what you want and others you should not retry. Or you can retry all what you want but only at X maps, and if you do it at other maps, then you lose skills.

No idea.

The only thing what I'm 100% sure about this is retriying you lost stamina. If you want stamina don't retry. Can't get nothing more about my experience as a player who almost never retry.
pandaBee
Hi OP, I fixed your graphic for you. You can repost it now.



P.S.

You do realize that the people we give the "never retry" advice are a different subset of players than the top 10k? Do you really think the top 10k come to G&R for advice? More like 100k and up.

Using data from the elite playerbase to make conjectures about the bottom of the barrel dregs of circle clicking society? Peppy pls.
KupcaH
O, another cool post.

*grabs popcorn*

pandaBee wrote:

You do realize that the people we give the "never retry" advice are a different subset of players than the top 10k? Do you really think the top 10k come to G&R for advice? More like 100k and up.
how do I get better?
N0thingSpecial
Just sayin

What if there’s so little people who actually retry less, that you’re just plotting graph of people who retry just as much as each other? What if the meta is mostly comprise of short maps and there’s not a significant difference between people who’s farming from a person who is just F2ing maps which also landed on short maps?

Your data still have too much other variables affecting it like inactive players, non meta players, just the fact that no one’s improvement graph has a linear progression shows that your data could vary based on when you collected the data.

I have nothing intelligent to contribute to this discussion, retry less holds in my mind cause of the “play from start to finish” part
Topic Starter
Railey2

N0thingSpecial wrote:

Your data still have too much other variables affecting it like inactive players, non meta players, just the fact that no one’s improvement graph has a linear progression shows that your data could vary based on when you collected the data.
There's certainly a lot going on with the data, which is also why we have such a low correlation, but most things shouldn't mess with the trend line itself. For example.. there is no reason to believe that non-meta players, inactive players and so on have a higher or lower hit per play ratio, so these types would probably be distributed evenly over the x-axis and therefore cancel out. Rhey're going to be the same as the outliers that I removed in the "Filtered"-chart. They don't actually have an impact on the result. As I said, if the inaccuracies don't distort the trendline down or up in a systematic manner, there's no reason to be concerned about them.
We're not trying to have an accurate assessment of effect strength or anything, so we don't have to be that rigid about things.


N0thingSpecial wrote:

What if there’s so little people who actually retry less, that you’re just plotting graph of people who retry just as much as each other?
We're looking at quite a good range for "hits per play", from ~150 to ~300. I doubt that they're just all the same. People who retry less are going to sit closer to 300, people who retry more are going to sit closer to 150. Occasionally you'll get the guy who plays a lot of marathons but apart from that actually retries quite a lot and then still ends up with a higher number. But again, the correlation should still be there.

If you're farming, your hits per play are probably somewhere around 175. Unless someone hits F2 and lands on haitai all day, he's not gonna beat that figure.



pandaBee wrote:

Using data from the elite playerbase to make conjectures about the bottom of the barrel dregs of circle clicking society? Peppy pls.
sure, why not? "Play more" works for new players just like it works for pro players. Rohulk is preaching "never retry" to everyone indiscriminately, and religiously follows his own advice. "Challenge yourself and push your limits" has always been a cornerstone of improvement no matter where you go or what you do, it doesn't just apply to osu. Do you see any good reason why extrapolating the results wouldn't work?
pandaBee

Railey2 wrote:

sure, why not? "Play more" works for new players just like it works for pro players. Rohulk is preaching "never retry" to everyone indiscriminately, and religiously follows his own advice. "Challenge yourself and push your limits" has always been a cornerstone of improvement no matter where you go or what you do, it doesn't just apply to osu. Do you see any good reason why extrapolating the results wouldn't work?
There are plenty. A few off the top of my head:

players in the top 10k are for the most part well established with the various skillsets of Osu. Beginners and to an extent intermediates are not.

Beginners tend to fall into the trap of focusing on pp farming to inflate their egos and small PPs (am i good guiz? look how talented i am, look how much pp i have xdd) which leads to lopsided skillsets, bad habits, frustration, etc. High ranked players won't have a lot of these same issues since their skillsets are already well established (other than maybe the frustration).

High ranked players are well acquainted with many different styles of beatmaps and have accumulated a large volume of plays on a wide spread of maps. Beginners have not. Most beginners have a paltry amount of beatmaps and would benefit from expanding their pool.


That being said, playing more will usually always let you improve regardless of whether you're retrying or not. So of course you can improve while retrying, but there are good ways and bad ways, better ways and worse ways to go about doing things.
Endaris
Of course I support the idea of retrying.
That is why it is part of the core of my gameplay guide which you can check out here.
And always remember: Retry smart, play hard!
pandaBee

Endaris wrote:

Of course I support the idea of retrying.
That is why it is part of the core of my gameplay guide which you can check out here.
And always remember: Retry smart, play hard!
Wow what a shameless plug :^)

Personally speaking I usually play a map 2-3 times before moving on when I'm practicing that is.
abraker
my 2 cents: both have their benefits and draw backs.

Retrying a lot works in the short term, fails in the long term. When you retry the same map over, you will squeeze the pp you want from it, but ignore skill other maps may require. It's more a brute force method if anything. You will be able to do certain maps pretty well, and others not too well.


Variety fails in the short term, but works in the long term. You are going to do horribly on every map at first, but slowly improve on all of them as time goes on. You won't see sudden big pp gains from this, and so it may look less rewarding. However, you will have the skill set needed to handle most things thrown at you, but to a not precise degree.
chainpullz
You did a decent job of discussing some of the limitations of your metrics only to handwave them all away saying "I don't believe the numbers lie."

The core issue being that pp is a very bad indicator of skill for the purpose of this argument. The argument isn't that never retrying is the best way to improve at farming pp. It's that excessive retrying leads to overfitting. People just have a tendency to parrot the overly exaggerated trivially incorrect version of the argument.

Your results primarily indicate that retrying/focusing on short pp rewarding maps will increase the rate that you improve on pp farm maps. No shit sherlock, that much should be obvious without any data mining required.

On the flip side, there is no way to measure a player's ability to play every sort of map (a skill typically beneficial in tournaments) and not just a narrow subset of them that provides the highest pp returns on investment.

I'm not saying you're wrong, just that your data is not sufficient to support the strong conclusion you are trying to make.
NightNarumi
It’s a bit unfortunate that we don’t have better variables to get a more detailed and precise analysis.
It was a good read though, thx :p
B1rd
I don't suppose OP is well versed in the scientific method. If he was, he would know that the data doesn't come close to supporting the hypothesis that retrying doesn't hinder improvement, and he should just get rid of any implications that it does before his intellectual credibility goes down the drain.
Please sign in to reply.

New reply