[Top][All Lists]

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

RE: [Bug-gnubg] Confusing analysis of Too Good decision

From: Ian Shaw
Subject: RE: [Bug-gnubg] Confusing analysis of Too Good decision
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 11:52:49 +0100

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joern Thyssen [mailto:address@hidden
> [snip]
> > Market Window erm... Window:)
> Huh? The market window window?
How about, "The Market Window tab on the Theory window".

> MWC for no double, win: 93.01% ( 53.4% * 100% + 46,6% * 85% )
> MWC for double, take, win: 100%
> MWC for no double, lose: 50%
> MWC for double, take, lose: 0%
> So you risk 50% to gain 6.99%, i.e., the double point is: 
> 87.735% which
> is exactly what my version of gnubg reports.
Your calculation is indeed correct. Sorry.

> I can see that the row with "take point" is confusing, both the dead
> cube and live cube take points should be given:
Yes, I think this would help.

> Market window for player tasmanian_devil:
>               Dead cube   Live cube
> Take point  : 20,000%     15,000%
> Double Point: 21,851%
> Cash Point  : 66,667%
> Too good    :100,000%
> Market window for ian:
>               Dead cube   Live cube
> Take point  : 33,333%
> Double Point: 78,149%     87,735%
> Cash Point  : 80,000%     85,000%
> Too good    : 84,300%
> > 
> > By this calculation the correct action is a straightforward 
> No Redouble,
> > Take. This agrees with the annotation window but not with 
> the game analysis,
> > which lists it as a "Wrong double around TG" rather than a 
> "Wrong double
> > around DP" (see above).
> Yes, gnubg is confused over the points being so close. Since 
> your gwc is
> closest to the too good point, you can argue that gnubg is correct.

I agree that GnuBg is arguably correct, but I still found it confusing.
Perhaps the truth table for match cube reports should go:

                                                Double Action   Take Action
Not Too Good    No Double       Take    No Double               Take
Not Too Good    No Double       Pass                    
Not Too Good    Double  Take    Double          Take
Not Too Good    Double  Pass    Double          Pass
Too Good                No Double       Take    Play On         Take
Too Good                No Double       Pass    Play On         Pass
Too Good                Double  Take    Too Good                Take
Too Good                Double  Pass    Too Good                Pass

I've used "Play On" for the cases where you are Too Good and Not Good
Enough. It is less descriptive but shorter and easier to fit in the space
I don't think there is a situation which is theoretically Not Too Good, No
Double, Pass.

A Wrong Double About Too Good would have to be above the doubling point.


reply via email to

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