[Top][All Lists]

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

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

From: Holger
Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Wrong cube errors categories in analysis statistics panel
Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2003 00:26:19 +0200

At 23:32 03.10.2003, Joern Thyssen wrote:
On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 11:06:11PM +0200, Holger wrote
> all those figures by now. (I guess I'd need someone to explain me the
> origins of MWC, GWC, equity and the match points. Or does somebody have a
> reference on this?)

A short course:

Thank you, Jørn.

GWC = game winning chance. The chance of winning the current game. gnubg
stores the cubeless gwc it in arOutput[ OUTPUT_WIN ]. The remaining
values in arOutput are the cubeless gammon/backgammon percentages.

This I knew. So GWC does not include any _value_ for gammons or backgammons.

MWC = match winning chance. The chance of winning the match. The
cubeless MWC is usually calculated from the the cubeless gwc, gammon,
and backgammon percentages using a match equity table. The cubeless MWC
is not stored anywhere in gnubg, but must be calculated from arOutput
when needed. The cubeful MWC is stored in arOutput[ OUTPUT_CBEFUL ].

equity = the expected number of points for this game. At least two kinds
of equities exists: money equity and normalised equity (for match play).
The money equity is just
2*arOutput[WIN]+arOutput[WIN_G]-arOutput[LOSE_G] (ignoring gammons). THe
normalised equity is calculated from the cubeless MWC using linear
interpolation. gnubg stores the equity (cubeless money equity/cubeless
normalised equity) in arOutput[ OUTPUT_EQUITY ].  The cubeful money
equity is stored in arOutput[ OUTPUT_CUBEFUL ] for money game.

You can calculate the take point in any of these quanties. gnubg just
happens to do it in cubeless GWCs.

Ok, but there is still one thing I don't understand. If the calculation of the match points accounts for gammon (and backgammon) values then how can it be compared with GWC, that doesn't? I'm not saying that you're not correct. I just don't get this particular point. If I'm not mistaken I can be too good if I have high gammon chances, but just have a double when I have the same winning probability and less gammon chances. And as above, the GWC doesn't reflect this, does it? (If it does, then how?)



reply via email to

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