BGonline.org Forums

Question on Notation

Posted By: Nack Ballard
Date: Friday, 7 January 2011, at 10:09 p.m.

In Response To: Question on Notation (David Rockwell)

Use of the + sign looks good for V2 XGR+.

When V2 is available and regular 3 ply rollouts are being done on it, should we have an additional symbol or will < suffice? I don't have a feel for the differences that we can expect between < and V2, so I don't know how important this will be.

Me neither. However, Neil says that XG2 is the second coming, so I intend to add the " (double-quotation mark) symbol before all XG2 rollout results ("<, "^, ">, "=, "+, for 3-ply, 4-ply, 5-ply, roller and roller+, respectively). If parallel long-rollout results subsequently suggest there is little difference and there seems to be consensus the extra symbol is more clutter than it is worth then I'll drop it. In the meantime, any XG result without the " symbol (i.e., <, ^, etc.) can be assumed to be XG1, though if anyone wants to emphasize it is XG1 then he can add a single quotation mark, a.k.a. an apostrophe); that is, '<, '^, etc.

Nack

Messages In This Thread

• Opening 21 [$ 7.9S]46+
  neilkaz -- Friday, 7 January 2011, at 2:22 a.m.
  • Opening 21 [$ 7.9S]46+
    eXtreme Gammon -- Friday, 7 January 2011, at 3:23 a.m.
    • Opening 21 [$ 7.9S]46+
      Nack Ballard -- Friday, 7 January 2011, at 5:40 a.m.
      • Correction
        Nack Ballard -- Friday, 7 January 2011, at 7:16 a.m.
    • Incorrect 2nd roll replies
      mtuhtan -- Friday, 7 January 2011, at 1:24 p.m.
      • Incorrect 2nd roll replies
        eXtreme Gammon -- Friday, 7 January 2011, at 2:13 p.m.
  • Opening 21 [$ S7.9] "+46
    Nack Ballard -- Friday, 7 January 2011, at 6:00 a.m.
    • Question on Notation
      David Rockwell -- Friday, 7 January 2011, at 7:01 p.m.
      • Question on Notation
        Nack Ballard -- Friday, 7 January 2011, at 10:09 p.m.