[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Bug-gnubg] Double Decisions

From: Peter Carlson
Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Double Decisions
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 07:18:32 -0600
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20070728)

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?


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.

reply via email to

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