[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Wrong cube errors categories in analysis statistics

From: Massimiliano . Maini
Subject: Re: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Wrong cube errors categories in analysis statistics panel
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 12:46:39 +0200

>Granted, in theory, it lacked analyzing players' doubling strategy around
>CP. But, again, in practical terms, the CP information is of very limited
>value-added, and just adds confusion :
>- first, as Holger correctly stated, there is no such thing as a a 'Wrong
>double around cash point', so this stats line should disappear.
>- now, what about 'Missed double around cash point"? Again, from a practical
>point of view : why would a player carry on playing around his CP? Surely he
>knows he has a double - otherwise, I should urge him to read Robertie's 501
>three times in a row :-)) - because around CP his position must make him a
>large favorite in the game. So, if he plays the position instead of cashing
>it, in his mind it HAS to be a 'too good' problematic and reasoning. OK, I
>realize my explanation is a tad tedious, but I hope you'll get the picture.
>My point is 'Missed double around cash point", even if this is theoretically
>incorrect, should be merged with 'Missed double around TG', as was the case
>before, because in essence they refer to exactly the same nature of decision
>by players. Actually, since it was the cashing decision that was correct and
>missed, it even should be the other way round : it is 'Missed double around
>TG" that should be merged into 'Missed double around CP'
>So I suggest getting back to former categories...
>                                      GNU                  FRENCHKISS
>Missed doubles around DP              0                    0
>Missed doubles around TG              0                    0
>Wrong doubles around DP               0                    0
>Wrong doubles around TG               0                    0
>- and, yes, I chose on purpose a game where I made no mistake, wasn't that
>easy to find :-) -
>... but renaming 'Missed doubles around TG' in 'Missed doubles around CP',
>because again this illustrates better the nature of the decision that had to
>be made. But for the same reason I would leave 'Wrong doubles around TG'
>untouched, because here the position was indeed too good.

Just to clarify (I'm putting Jim's explanation in a more readable format,
provided you have a wide enough screen), this is what (I think) it is
done now :

       GWC     |         DP        S1         CP        S2        TG        |
ACTION    |         |         |          |         |         |         |
          |         |         |          |         |         |         |
DOUBLE    |   WADP  |    //   |    //    |    //   |    //   |   WATG  |
          |         |         |          |         |         |         |
NON DOUBLE     |    //   |    MADP |    MACP  |    MACP      |    MATG      |
//   |
          |         |         |          |         |         |         |

WA -> Wrong Aound, MA -> Missed Around

Now what you're saying is that a MACP is either a MADP or a MATG (taking
the arithmetic mean of DP and TG as separation point, old logic).
Personally I don't see anything wrong with the current classification, it
simply gives a bit more of information that the one you propose (i.e. the
old one).
If you carry on playing knowing you are between CP and TG, you are wrong
and the fact you think you are above TG is not a good reason to classify
the missed double as "around TG".
Following your reasoning, a player that doesn't double when he's slightly
above DP and largerly below TG should have his mistake classified as "missed
around TG" simply because he thought he was above TG.

As a totally minor detail, I would change the displayed text to something
like :

     Wrong double  (below DP)
     Wrong double  (above TG)
     Missed double (above DP)
     Missed double (around CP)
     Missed double (below TG)

One thing I can't figure out is what happens when TG is below DP.
This may happen in match play, playing for an undoubled gammon (e.g.
at -2,-4 with significative gammon chances, as Joern pointed out in
a previous thread on the subject).
Assuming the CP will still be above the DP, the CP/TG separator (S2)
will no longer have sense and you will need a new separator between TG
and DP (the order being now TG -- DP -- CP). I don't know if the
currently implemented logic does this or not.

A small (big) request related to the subject : the Market Window
panel allows to modify the current position's gammon/backgammon
rates (GR1, BR1, GR2, BR2), but not the winning chances (W1% only,
since W2% = 1-W1%).
With just one more edit field (for W1%) the Market Window panel
would be a complete Market Window Calculator that could be used
"stand alone", without any current position, just to "play" with
market windows.
Ok, maybe this should be more a stand alone tool than something
integrated in GNUbg, but everything is already there beside the
single edit field in the GUI for the winning chances, so ....


Another minor detail : manually entering gammon/backgammon rates,
rates above 100% (or below 0%) are fixed to 100% (0%), but there's
no check on the fact that GR+BR<=100% : you can get funny DP at
-150% or at +230%, way too wild :)))

reply via email to

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