[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums

bear off cube - epc

Posted By: rambiz
Date: Sunday, 26 June 2011, at 8:37 p.m.

In Response To: bear off cube - epc (zalan)

I have just read through the posts of Bob Koca, Neil Kazaross, Mr Majestyk, Stick and Bill Calton.

To Bob and partly to Neil, I have to say that Trice's EPC formula is not only for "Rolls vs Pips" positions but also for "Pips vs Rolls" positions. please reread the discussion of
XGID=----CDC---------------eee-:0:0:1:00:0:0:3:0:10 in http://www.bkgm.com/articles/EffectivePipCount/.
It is however very alert of them, to emphasize the higher volatility of zalan's position compared to a "Pips vs Rolls" or "Rolls vs Pips" with the same EPCs, which implies better chances for the taker as possibly indicated by Trice's rule.

With all due respect, I think Mr Majestyk is applying Trice's "minus 5, divide by 7, round down" rule to EPC's and not to pips. I think, it is a mistake. However, I recall, MCG did the same in one of his Gammon Village articles, too. So I want to apologize in advance, in case I'm the one who is mixing things up.

Back to the position: you can find the "number of rolls" by subtracting 1 and dividing by 7, no matter if it is a rolls position or a pips position. This might sound strange but that's what Walter's rule states. So (36.1-1)/7=5 1/7, minus 3 makes 2 1/7. White is 2.2=2 1/5 EPCs behind which is more than 2 1/7, but two factors indicate towards a take. Firstly as mentioned by Bob and Neil the higher volatility, and secondly Cube Vig. Whenever I have 2 checkers on the deuce point, I am dreaming of shipping it over. Here white has 4 checkers on deuce.

Messages In This Thread

 

Post Response
Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:
Subject:
Message:

If necessary, enter your password below:

Password:
 

 

[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.