[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Re: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Wrong cube errors categories in analysis statist
From: |
Massimiliano . Maini |
Subject: |
Re: Re: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Wrong cube errors categories in analysis statistics panel |
Date: |
Thu, 2 Oct 2003 16:19:03 +0200 |
>>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)
>
>As you write, it gives *a bit* more information, but adds confusion too and
>opens the door for difficulty in categorizing doubling mistakes. What's the
>trade? Obviously only subjective answers to this. Anyway, what didn't make
>sense at all to me in the first place was that 'Wrong double around CP'
>stuff, but that's settled now as everybody agrees it should be removed.
The trade is a just the extra precision on the missed double position,
but as you said, its usefulness is subjective. On the other hand, it
shouldn't confuse the users that much.
In fact, I've just found another reasonable classification.
That's the current one (with slightly clearer text, I think) :
Wrong double (below DP)
Wrong double (above TG)
Missed double (above DP) (around DP in GNUbg)
Missed double (around CP) (around CP in GNUbg)
Missed double (below TG) (arounf TG in GNUbg)
That's the last one I came up with :
Wrong double (below DP)
Wrong double (above TG)
Missed double (below CP) (and above DP, that's implicit)
Missed double (above CP) (and below TG, that's implicit)
In fact, when you miss below CP, it was a Double/Take, when you miss above
CP it was a Double/Pass. This classification has 2 advantages :
1) 2 Missed catagories instead of 3 : should be easier to handle
exotic cases (like TG<DP), since there's only one separator
(CP) and CP is always above DP (right ?).
2) It tells you what the opponent should have done (take/pass),
which is probably the only meaningful information.
Many beginners (and some intermediate to advanced) players
will notice that they miss much more double/take than double/pass.
So my final suggestion for double classification (at least for today) is :
Wrong double (below DP)
Wrong double (above TG)
Missed double (below CP) or Missed double/take (below CP)
Missed double (above CP) or Missed double/pass (above CP)
>Still, I don't think you mentioned, in math terms, when a 'Missed double
>(above DP)' will fall into the 'Missed double (around CP)' category. Will
>you simply take the arithmetic mean between DP and CP?
>Same question goes for Missed double (around CP) and Missed double (below
>TG). But here it will be much more tricky, especially in match play as you
>mentioned.
Yes, arithmetic mean. When you are closer to CP than to DP , then you're
around CP and not aroud DP. Same thing for CP-TG, but with possible nasty
situations in match play (TG<DP). That's where the simpler classification
should help.
Well, I'll sleep on it a whole night and let the other guys give their
opinion on it.
MaX.