Re: [Bug-gnubg] Double Decisions

[Peter Carlson]

I dont really have any precise data.  It's more of a feeling.  Obviously 
if gnu thinks it is in a losing position it wont offer a double.  I 
guess what my main point was that once gnu offers, if you press hint, 
the hint will > 75% of the time - based upon actual game playing - 
advise you to take the double.  Then almost 100% of the time I'll lose, 
following the hints for every play.  For example:

gnu offers double
hint says take, so I take
gnu rolls and plays
I roll and press hint and I have *usually* less then 20% chance of 
winning.  I follow each hint for every roll and I end up losing. 

So again the real question is would gnu offer a double if it didn't 
think it was in a significantly better position to win.  And if it is in 
a better position to win, which I have to believe it is, why would the 
hint offer to take?

Peter

Joseph Heled wrote:
> On 8/20/07, Peter Carlson <address@hidden> wrote:
>   
> > Why does gnu *almost* always recommend to take a double.  I have noticed
> > after playing literally hundreds of games against gnu that 99% of the
> > time it recommends to take a double it is just plain WRONG!  besides why
> > would gnu offer a double if the odds weren't greatly in its favor to
> > win???  here is just one example:
> >
> >     
>
> If you have some precise data we can evaluate what you mean by
> "almost". I can hazard a guess that since gnubg generally doubles
> earlier than humans (i.e. is less likely to double late) you have more
> takes against it than you normally have.
>
>   

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.