| |
BGonline.org Forums
Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
Posted By: David Rockwell In Response To: Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts (Nack Ballard)
Date: Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 2:30 p.m.
Whatever rules are developed, one has to translate from the ideal (for example, the gold standard) to the practical position which is going to have wastage. One must estimate the wastage in each position as compared to the ideal. The translation won't be perfect unless the evaluataion of wastage is perfect.
None of this is really worth the time and effort (which won't stop me from working on it). N57 is all that a practical player would ever need. To the extent that further research is done, I would favor using positions of extreme minimal wastage. The term median low-wastage is not very precise. I believe that using minimal wastage positions would allow the most consistent adjustment for practical wastage when evaluating an actual position. To do this, one must find the most favorable bearin / bearoff position for every given pip count and evaluate them. I would not do this constant with 15 checkers. For each pip count I would consider all possible combinations of checkers remaining and choose the optimum configuration. I expect all of this work would result in a shift of one or two pips in the Gold Standard.
As a practical matter, the mistakes made mis-evaluating wastage will be huge compared to mistakes made due to imprecision in the formula.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.