Skip to main content

Results of the Dev Gym Logic Championship for 2018

You will find below the rankings for the Logic Annual Championship for quizzes played in 2018. The number next to the player's name is the number of times that player has participated in a championship. Below the table of results for this championship, you will find another list showing the championship history of each of these players.

Congratulations first and foremost to our top-ranked players:

1st Place: Stelios Vlasopoulos

2nd Place: Pavel Zeman

3rd Place: Sartograph 

Next, congratulations to everyone who played in the championship. We hope you found it entertaining, challenging and educational. And for those who were not able to participate in the championship, you can take the quizzes through the Practice feature. We will also make the championship as a whole available as a Test, so you can take it just like these players did.

Finally, many thanks to Eli Feuerstein, the Logic Quizmaster who provided a very challenging set of quizzes, and our deepest gratitude to our reviewers, especially Livio Curzola, who has once again performed an invaluable service to our community.

Rank Name Total Time % Correct Total Score
1 Stelios Vlasopoulos (6) 15 m 100% 4611
2 Pavel Zeman (5) 35 m 100% 4511
3 Sartograph (4) 35 m 100% 4511
4 Sandra99 (6) 37 m 100% 4500
5 seanm95 (6) 52 m 100% 4425
6 Vyacheslav Stepanov (6) 17 m 96% 4414
7 NickL (5) 56 m 100% 4407
8 umir (6) 43 m 92% 4097
9 Köteles Zsolt (5) 44 m 92% 4092
10 richdellheim (6) 59 m 92% 4014
11 mentzel.iudith (6) 34 m 88% 3953
12 craig.mcfarlane (5) 57 m 88% 3835
13 NielsHecker (6) 59 m 88% 3828
14 Talebian (5) 53 m 84% 3668
15 gabt (1) 37 m 80% 3564
16 Tony Winn (4) 48 m 80% 3510
17 Vijay Mahawar (6) 59 m 80% 3450
18 whab@tele2.at (4) 40 m 76% 3360
19 Mike Tessier (4) 44 m 72% 3151
20 Chad Lee (6) 50 m 72% 3123
21 msonkoly (4) 59 m 72% 3075
22 JasonC (6) 34 m 68% 3017
23 Michal P. (2) 56 m 68% 2906
24 Stanislovas (3) 43 m 60% 2594
25 RalfK (5) 59 m 60% 2516
26 Ludovic Szewczyk (2) 59 m 56% 2325
27 Cor van Berkel (5) 44 m 52% 2215
28 Kias (3) 06 m 44% 2028
29 mcelaya (4) 25 m 44% 1937

Championship Performance History

After each name, the quarter in which he or she played, and the ranking in that championship.

Name History
Stelios Vlasopoulos 2013:16th, 2014:29th, 2015:19th, 2016:8th, 2017:1st, 2018:1st
Pavel Zeman 2014:7th, 2015:1st, 2016:3rd, 2017:2nd, 2018:2nd
Sartograph 2015:24th, 2016:21st, 2017:5th, 2018:3rd
Sandra99 2013:17th, 2014:19th, 2015:7th, 2016:4th, 2017:10th, 2018:4th
seanm95 2013:24th, 2014:26th, 2015:33rd, 2016:12th, 2017:22nd, 2018:5th
Vyacheslav Stepanov 2013:1st, 2014:5th, 2015:2nd, 2016:1st, 2017:11th, 2018:6th
NickL 2014:14th, 2015:23rd, 2017:20th, 2018:7th
umir 2016:30th, 2017:12th, 2018:8th
Köteles Zsolt 2014:25th, 2015:4th, 2016:7th, 2017:15th, 2018:9th
richdellheim 2013:31st, 2014:6th, 2015:8th, 2016:13th, 2017:31st, 2018:10th
mentzel.iudith 2013:4th, 2014:18th, 2015:22nd, 2016:6th, 2017:6th, 2018:11th
craig.mcfarlane 2014:8th, 2015:5th, 2017:16th, 2018:12th
NielsHecker 2013:3rd, 2014:21st, 2015:11th, 2016:27th, 2017:19th, 2018:13th
Talebian 2014:10th, 2015:9th, 2018:14th
gabt 2018:15th
Tony Winn 2013:25th, 2016:25th, 2017:7th, 2018:16th
Vijay Mahawar 2015:27th, 2016:24th, 2017:17th, 2018:17th
whab@tele2.at 2015:30th, 2017:33rd, 2018:18th
Mike Tessier 2015:40th, 2016:20th, 2017:4th, 2018:19th
Chad Lee 2013:34th, 2014:31st, 2015:38th, 2016:5th, 2017:8th, 2018:20th
msonkoly 2015:21st, 2017:23rd, 2018:21st
JasonC 2013:35th, 2014:12th, 2015:26th, 2016:2nd, 2017:9th, 2018:22nd
Michal P. 2017:24th, 2018:23rd
Stanislovas 2016:31st, 2017:26th, 2018:24th
RalfK 2015:20th, 2016:15th, 2017:13th, 2018:25th
Ludovic Szewczyk 2018:26th
Cor van Berkel 2014:36th, 2015:17th, 2018:27th
Kias 2017:30th, 2018:28th
mcelaya 2015:25th, 2017:32nd, 2018:29th
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Quick Guide to User-Defined Types in Oracle PL/SQL

A Twitter follower recently asked for more information on user-defined types in the PL/SQL language, and I figured the best way to answer is to offer up this blog post. PL/SQL is a strongly-typed language . Before you can work with a variable or constant, it must be declared with a type (yes, PL/SQL also supports lots of implicit conversions from one type to another, but still, everything must be declared with a type). PL/SQL offers a wide array of pre-defined data types , both in the language natively (such as VARCHAR2, PLS_INTEGER, BOOLEAN, etc.) and in a variety of supplied packages (e.g., the NUMBER_TABLE collection type in the DBMS_SQL package). Data types in PL/SQL can be scalars, such as strings and numbers, or composite (consisting of one or more scalars), such as record types, collection types and object types. You can't really declare your own "user-defined" scalars, though you can define subtypes  from those scalars, which can be very helpful from the p
24 comments
Read more

The differences between deterministic and result cache features

 EVERY once in a while, a developer gets in touch with a question like this: I am confused about the exact difference between deterministic and result_cache. Do they have different application use cases? I have used deterministic feature in many functions which retrieve data from some lookup tables. Is it essential to replace these 'deterministic' key words with 'result_cache'?  So I thought I'd write a post about the differences between these two features. But first, let's make sure we all understand what it means for a function to be  deterministic. From Wikipedia : In computer science, a deterministic algorithm is an algorithm which, given a particular input, will always produce the same output, with the underlying machine always passing through the same sequence of states.  Another way of putting this is that a deterministic subprogram (procedure or function) has no side-effects. If you pass a certain set of arguments for the parameters, you will always get
14 comments
Read more

How to Pick the Limit for BULK COLLECT

This question rolled into my In Box today: In the case of using the LIMIT clause of BULK COLLECT, how do we decide what value to use for the limit? First I give the quick answer, then I provide support for that answer Quick Answer Start with 100. That's the default (and only) setting for cursor FOR loop optimizations. It offers a sweet spot of improved performance over row-by-row and not-too-much PGA memory consumption. Test to see if that's fast enough (likely will be for many cases). If not, try higher values until you reach the performance level you need - and you are not consuming too much PGA memory.  Don't hard-code the limit value: make it a parameter to your subprogram or a constant in a package specification. Don't put anything in the collection you don't need. [from Giulio Dottorini] Remember: each session that runs this code will use that amount of memory. Background When you use BULK COLLECT, you retrieve more than row with each fetch,
4 comments
Read more