BGonline.org Forums

123 vs 137 with mid pt contact

Posted By: Nack Ballard
Date: Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 8:41 p.m.

In Response To: 123 vs 137 with mid pt contact (neilkaz)

I think for purposes of establishing minimal wastage positions, it is better to avoid positions like the one you rolled out in this post. The problem is that if one or both sides roll combinations of big numbers, there will some sort of wastage, as the midpoint and 8pt checkers are poorly placed to handle big numbers. I'm not sure whether that favors the leader or the trailer (offsetting arguments), but anyway it conflicts with the goal of minimal wastage.

The contact from mutual midpoints might add in some small way to the problem. It seems to me it should hurt the leader (who will suffer from loss of option to play only one checker off the mid sooner) more than the trailer, though your subsequent rollouts don't clearly show that, so maybe it's just that the whole contact concept is even smaller than I'm imagining.

Btw, I hope you won't start skimping on the number of trials. This one didn't even quite make 5k.

In any case, we shouldn't ignore whatever midpoint vs midpoint data we accumulate (accidental or otherwise). It will give us a clue how much to adjust normally arising midpoint races from the contrived minimal-wastage rollouts being done at higher leader counts.

Nack

Messages In This Thread

• "Nack 57" rule -- new race formula (for both traditional and Naccel)
  Nack Ballard -- Wednesday, 3 February 2010, at 4:30 p.m.
  • "Nack 57" rule -- new race formula (for both traditional and Naccel)
    KenB -- Wednesday, 3 February 2010, at 5:43 p.m.
    • "Nack 57" rule -- new race formula (for both traditional and Naccel)
      Nack Ballard -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 7:39 p.m.
  • "Nack 57" rule -- new race formula (for both traditional and Naccel)
    David Rockwell -- Wednesday, 3 February 2010, at 5:54 p.m.
    • "Nack 57" rule -- new race formula (for both traditional and Naccel)
      Nack Ballard -- Wednesday, 3 February 2010, at 11:13 p.m.
  • "Nack 57" rule -- new race formula (for both traditional and Naccel)
    Bob Koca -- Wednesday, 3 February 2010, at 6:26 p.m.
  • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
    neilkaz -- Wednesday, 3 February 2010, at 8:53 p.m.
    • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
      Bob Koca -- Wednesday, 3 February 2010, at 9:15 p.m.
    • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
      Timothy Chow -- Wednesday, 3 February 2010, at 9:31 p.m.
      • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
        Bob Koca -- Wednesday, 3 February 2010, at 9:55 p.m.
        • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
          Timothy Chow -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 1:51 a.m.
      • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
        Ian Shaw -- Wednesday, 3 February 2010, at 11:47 p.m.
        • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
          Ian Shaw -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 12:16 a.m.
        • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
          Bob Koca -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 12:32 a.m.
      • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
        Rich Munitz -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 5:00 a.m.
        • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
          Nack Ballard -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 5:52 a.m.
          • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
            David Rockwell -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 2:30 p.m.
            • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
              Timothy Chow -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 4:07 p.m.
              • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
                Ian Shaw -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 4:23 p.m.
                • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
                  David Rockwell -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 4:24 p.m.
                • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
                  Timothy Chow -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 5:18 p.m.
                  • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
                    Ian Shaw -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 10:54 p.m.
              • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
                Bob Koca -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 8:40 p.m.
            • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
              Nack Ballard -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 8:18 p.m.
              • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
                David Rockwell -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 8:33 p.m.
                • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
                  David Rockwell -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 9:12 p.m.
                • Number of checkers represented at lower counts
                  Nack Ballard -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 9:38 p.m.
                  • Number of checkers represented at lower counts
                    David Rockwell -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 10:28 p.m.
                  • Number of checkers represented at lower counts
                    Ian Shaw -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 11:05 p.m.
              • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
                neilkaz -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 8:42 p.m.
                • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
                  Nack Ballard -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 9:55 p.m.
              • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
                Bob Koca -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 8:43 p.m.
              • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
                Timothy Chow -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 10:13 p.m.
            • Ideal Racing Positions - Tables Available
              Taper_Mike -- Thursday, 23 June 2011, at 6:49 a.m.
              • Ideal Racing Positions - Tables Available
                rambiz -- Thursday, 23 June 2011, at 7:37 a.m.
                • Ideal Racing Positions - Tables Available
                  mtuhtan -- Thursday, 23 June 2011, at 7:45 a.m.
                • Ideal Racing Positions - Tables Available
                  Taper_Mike -- Thursday, 23 June 2011, at 9:01 a.m.
                • Ideal Racing Positions - Tables Available
                  Tom Keith -- Thursday, 23 June 2011, at 12:57 p.m.
                  • Ideal Racing Positions - Tables Available
                    neilkaz -- Thursday, 23 June 2011, at 3:33 p.m.
                  • Ideal Racing Positions - Tables Available
                    Taper_Mike -- Thursday, 23 June 2011, at 5:32 p.m.
              • Ideal Racing Positions - Tables Available
                David Rockwell -- Thursday, 23 June 2011, at 3:20 p.m.
              • Ideal Racing Positions - Tables Available
                Bill Patterson -- Thursday, 23 June 2011, at 3:40 p.m.
              • Ideal Racing Positions - Tables Available
                Bob Koca -- Thursday, 23 June 2011, at 4:21 p.m.
                • Ideal Racing Positions - Tables Available
                  Taper_Mike -- Thursday, 23 June 2011, at 4:44 p.m.
                  • Link to file
                    Tom Keith -- Thursday, 23 June 2011, at 5:49 p.m.
                    • Ideal Racing Positions - Tables Available
                      Taper_Mike -- Friday, 1 July 2011, at 12:48 a.m.
              • Ideal Racing Positions - Tables Available
                Taper_Mike -- Thursday, 23 June 2011, at 5:42 p.m.
                • Ideal Racing Positions - Tables Available
                  Tom Keith -- Thursday, 23 June 2011, at 5:59 p.m.
          • Very nice, but just a tad conservative for raw pip counts
            neilkaz -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 3:43 p.m.
            • Testing subtracting 32 on the low end of pip count range
              neilkaz -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 4:20 p.m.
            • 124 vs 138 pips..subtracting 32 is good
              neilkaz -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 5:13 p.m.
              • 124 vs 138 pips..subtracting 32 is good
                David Rockwell -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 5:46 p.m.
                • 124 vs 138 pips..subtracting 32 is good
                  Bob Koca -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 8:09 p.m.
              • 123 vs 137 probably a bare pass
                neilkaz -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 6:39 p.m.
                • 123 vs 137 with mid pt contact
                  neilkaz -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 7:10 p.m.
                  • 123 vs 137 normal looking position
                    neilkaz -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 8:12 p.m.
                  • 123 vs 137 with mid pt contact
                    Nack Ballard -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 8:41 p.m.
                    • 123 vs 137 with mid pt contact
                      neilkaz -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 8:48 p.m.
            • Extending higher.. 137 vs 152 pips
              neilkaz -- Friday, 5 February 2010, at 3:48 a.m.
              • Extending higher.. 137 vs 152 pips
                Nack Ballard -- Friday, 5 February 2010, at 4:40 a.m.
                • Extending higher.. 137 vs 152 pips
                  neilkaz -- Friday, 5 February 2010, at 7:15 p.m.
    • Perspective (on gold standard and N57)
      Nack Ballard -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 2:56 a.m.
      • Perspective (on gold standard and N57)
        jdg -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 2:54 p.m.
    • Can you trust these XG rollouts?
      Neil Robins -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 6:33 p.m.
      • GNU RO of my 61-69 pip pos is same
        neilkaz -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 7:35 p.m.
        • GNU RO of my 61-69 pip pos is same
          Nack Ballard -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 7:48 p.m.
          • GNU RO of my 61-69 pip pos is same..and
            neilkaz -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 7:58 p.m.
            • 61-69 no VR
              neilkaz -- Friday, 5 February 2010, at 12:22 a.m.
      • Can you trust these XG rollouts?
        eXtreme Gammon -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 8:56 p.m.
        • Can you trust these XG rollouts?
          Neil Robins -- Thursday, 4 February 2010, at 9:31 p.m.
          • Can you trust these XG rollouts?
            neilkaz -- Friday, 5 February 2010, at 12:19 a.m.
          • Can you trust these XG rollouts?
            eXtreme Gammon -- Friday, 5 February 2010, at 1:32 a.m.
            • Can you trust these XG rollouts?
              Neil Robins -- Friday, 5 February 2010, at 3:05 a.m.