Lightsabermetrics

I think there is a fair chance this post will validate the theory that I might spend a tad too much time pondering Star Wars.

Concept

1. Sabermetrics is the analysis of baseball through objective evidence, especially baseball statistics that measure in-game activity.
   
   
2. Lightsabermetrics is the analysis of Jedi/Sith confrontations through objective evidence, especially statistics that measure in-movie activity.
   

Since item 2 above has been under served, I took a shot.

Caveats

• Rankings only reflect "league games" - meaning Jedi v. Jedi or Jedi v. Sith. Younglings don't count. That would be like NFL teams counting wins against the Bills.
  
  
• For at least this first version, weighted 2 verses 1 battles the same as 1 on 1 smackdowns.
  

Insights

• It's good to be the Sith. They own 4 of the 5 top spots.
  
• Was surprised to see that, statistically speaking, Yoda and Qui-Gon Jinn kinda sucked.
• Darth Maul only fought Jedi with hyphenated names.
• Agen Kolar (killed immediately by Palpatine in episode III) Worst. Jedi. Ever.
  

Rankings/Record (episode number listed for each)

1. Mace Windu 1-0
   wins: Palpatine - III
   
   
2. Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader 13-3
   wins: Dooku - III, est. 10 unnamed Jedi in the Temple - III, Obi-Wan - IV, Luke - V
   losses: Dooku - II, Obi-Wan - III, Luke - VI
   
   
3. Palpatine/Darth Sideous 5-1
   wins: Agen Kolar - III, Saesee Tiin - III, Kit Fisto - III, Yoda - III, Luke - VI
   losses: Windu - III
   
   
4. Count Dooku 2-1-1
   wins: Obi-Wan - II, Anakin - II
   losses: Anakin III
   draws: Yoda - II
   
   
5. Darth Maul 1-1-1
   wins: Qui-Gon - I
   losses: Obi-Wan - I
   draws: Qui-Gon - I
   
   
6. Obi-Wan Kenobi 2-3
   wins: Darth Maul - I, Darth Vader-III
   losses: Dooku - II, Dooku - III, Darth Vader - IV
   
   
7. Luke Skywalker 1-2
   wins: Darth Vader - VI
   losses: Darth Vader - II, Palpatine - VI
   
   
8. Yoda 0-1-1
   losses: Palpatine - III
   draws: Dooku - II
   
   
9. Qui-Gon Jinn 0-1-1
   losses: Darth Maul - I
   draws: Darth Maul - I
   
   
10. Kit Fisto 0-1
    loss: Palpatine - III
    
    
11. Saesee Tiin 0-1
    loss: Palpatine - III
    
    
12. Agen Kolar 0-1
    loss: Palpatine - III
    

Scoring notes

• I gave Mace the win over Palpatine in III, but did not give anything to either Vader or Palpatine for the whole post-fight arm chop/force lightening action.
  
  
• I did count Luke's Episode V loss to Darth Vader even though he probably wasn't officially a Jedi yet. Seemed close enough for me.
  
  
• Again, Agen Kolar. Wow, just wow. You suck.
  

Very open to insights/observations/corrections on the scoring and ranking above.

Politely please :)

Profilin'

Boilerplate Kelly Thul profile:

Serial Dabbler. Hippie anarchist. 92% evil.

Commentary here is my own and does not represent my employer's positions, strategies, or opinions.

On occasion, I get the chance to speak to groups. I was a last minute sub recently and the organizer must of Googled me. He responded back to the person I was subbing for asking: "Is he the 92% evil guy?? If he is, hope we get the other 8%!"

So, figured it might be good to explain this a bit...

1. Serial dabbler - I am. To my core. I learn best via experience and be it Geocities, Amiga game development, Digg, generation zero stream-powered MP3 players, Xtranormal, Sea Monkeys... whatever - I try it out to attempt to gain a better understanding.
   
   
2. Hippie Anarchist - A coworker, and shockingly human-like lawyer, gave me this tag. It comes from a LA Times article quote from Thomas Nolle, "The problem is that it (the Internet) was devised by a bunch of hippie anarchists...". She viewed the folks mentioned in the quote and I as kindred spirits. She was pretty much right.
   
   
3. 92% evil - This was the score I received after completing a Facebook "How evil are you?" quiz. We are all aware of the rigorous scientific method Facebook insists upon for a quiz like this - so the results are not to be questioned. Most of the people I work with think the score is low BTW.
   
   
4. Commentary here is my own and does not represent my employer's positions, strategies, or opinions - Back to the serial dabbler/experiential learner thing. Social create this huge band of blur between professional and private musings. I want to understand it better, so here I sit blogging, tweeting, etc... to learn.
   
   I am a huge fan of the organization I work for and I am transparent as I can be when I talk about it. When I am not talking about it, I hope the language above helps create the appropriate distinction. While I think (hope) my company considers me an OK guy, I am certain my content (a mix of Alice Cooper/Star Wars/geekdom/zombies/White Sox/Nancy Grace hatred) is not reflected in company brand/communication objectives.
   
   Which is fine - for both of us :)

BTW, I am going to blog sometime on my favorite Twitter profiles later, but had to share my all time favorite one.

From @TakeSumE ...

I killed a lot of hitchhikers once.