Re: [Bug-gnubg] undefined equity

[Jim Segrave]

On Tue 18 Feb 2003 (14:15 +0000), Joern Thyssen wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> A few years back Paul Tanenbaum posted an interesting position on
> rec.games.backgammon:
> 
> http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&threadm=5tda97%242s8%241%40orthanc.reference.com&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dextremely%2Btheoretical%2Bpaul%2Btanenbaum%2Brec.games.backgammon%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26hl%3Den%26btnG%3DGoogle%2BSearch
> 
> for the original thread or just
> 
> http://www.bkgm.com/rgb/rgb.cgi?view+366
> 
> 
> During a discussion with Lars Trabolt (on copy) this position came up,
> and Lars asked more or less the same question as Brian Sheppard does in
> the original thread: if this position has undefined equity, and the
> position is legal and has a positive non-zero probability of occuring,
> wouldn't the starting position also have an undefined equity as well?
> 
> I can't answer this question :-) 
> 
> Are there any of you math guys out there who can? Gary? Doug?

My opinion, backed up by a less than awe-inspiring mathematical
background (why do you think I'm in computing) is that in unlimited
money games, this does say the starting position arguably has
undefined equity.

Match play or limited money play would not have this problem.

-- 
Jim Segrave           address@hidden