This is my opinion, other users might not feel the same about it.

The main part of the task is converting a given numerical rating to the textual representation of that rating and changing that textual representation does not make enough of a difference to consider it a different task.

One could also argue that your kata is actually an easier version of the existent kata given that, in your kata, one only has to consider 2 characters vs. the 3 characters in the existent kata.

Ah, I managed to miss that tab. Duplicated the trivial tests into the sample test, and wrote a random test which should disqualify extremely slow solutions.

• Duplicate

If you're interested in authoring kata, you should read the relevant documentation before your next attempt.

• no random tests
• no sample tests

not not id(object())//3%2

btw, I'm aware this isn't at all random, my initial version of this was an instance of malicious compliance with the tests. In fact, you can make this method perform hilariously badly:

In [1]: d = {True: 0, False: 0}

In [2]: for _ in range(1000000): d[not not id(object())//3%2] += 1

In [3]: d
Out[3]: {True: 0, False: 1000000}

In [4]: for _ in range(1000000): d[not not id(object())//3%2] += 1

In [5]: d
Out[5]: {True: 0, False: 2000000}

In [6]: for _ in range(1000000): d[not not id(object())//3%2] += 1

In [7]: d
Out[7]: {True: 1000000, False: 2000000}

Function id() always returns the even number. Your function is not random and always return True.

You can't do this... Function id() always returns the even number. Your function is not random and always return True.