| # | User | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Benq | 3676 |
| 2 | Kevin114514 | 3659 |
| 3 | jiangly | 3640 |
| 4 | turmax | 3450 |
| 5 | tourist | 3382 |
| 6 | strapple | 3360 |
| 7 | Um_nik | 3354 |
| 8 | squareOf105 | 3348 |
| 9 | maroonrk | 3312 |
| 10 | idontwannadothis…e | 3191 |
| # | User | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Qingyu | 155 |
| 2 | nik_exists | 151 |
| 3 | maspy | 149 |
| 4 | AmShZ | 145 |
| 5 | Um_nik | 143 |
| 6 | Errichto | 139 |
| 7 | BledDest | 136 |
| 8 | adamant | 134 |
| 9 | maroonrk | 132 |
| 10 | cry | 130 |
| Name |
|---|



When I see your blog, I look 'Top contributors' list immediately. And I saw you are not first..
stop it already
You said "let's assume we'll pick an odd-sized subset for now" and forgot to prove why it's optimal.
You're right, thanks for pointing this out! It's not necessarily optimal, one has to consider the even-sized subsets as well, but the solution is really similar for that case so I don't think digging into it would add much now :)
Actually in that problem one may prove that even-size subset can always be replaced with an odd-size subset without making the simple skewness smaller. Just consider removing the second middle element from the set.