[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bug-gnubg] Luck rates ?

From: Christian Anthon
Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Luck rates ?
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 23:17:13 +0100

On Nov 12, 2007 5:12 PM, Massimiliano Maini
<address@hidden> wrote:

> E.g., a last roll situation with the cube at various levels and the nasty
> 2-1
> coming out for player MaX (only losing roll):
> CUBE AT 1                                  gnubg                MaX
> Luck rate (total)                     +0.247 ( +0.247)     -1.889 ( -1.889)
> CUBE AT 2                                  gnubg                MaX
> Luck rate (total)                     +0.247 ( +0.247)     -1.889 ( -3.778)
> CUBE AT 4                                  gnubg                MaX
> Luck rate (total)                     +0.247 ( +0.247)     -1.889 ( -7.556)

I agree that the luck is probably better represented this way for a
single match length or a money game session. But the same argument
could be made for the error rate, i.e. should your errors be measured
in relation to the amount of match equity that you loose rather than
the amount of EMG. The reason that it is done this way for error rates
is obviously to be able to keep just on statistic independent of match
length. To me the error and luck are very similar, i.e. it doesn't
matter if you loose 0.2 point by bad luck or by making a major

That is the explanation, I believe, for the layout being as it is. But
I agree that the labels could be clearer, for example

Total luck - ME (EMG) == Luck rate (total)
Luck rate - ME (EMG) == Luck rate (per move)
Total error - ME (EMG) == Error rate (total)
Error rate - ME (EMG) == Error rate (per move)

(where ME == ME or points. The term Luck rate(total) is certainly meaningless.)

with these clearer labels I believe that we can interchange the the
values as you and Ian wish.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]