| |
|---|---|
There are actually two different Snowie rollouts. I believe that neither was ever posted (though I'm certainly happy to do so, on request). Here is the data:
- [W Z2 S4 U6 T24 H26 $28 %35 c52 e56 &77] ~20******10 5
[U Z6 W6 S14 $33 T23 H31 %38] ~10***7*5
In newer posts, I often list each rollout result separately. However, in older posts I was in the habit of combining them. In this case, the fact the rollouts produced two different best plays, that there were a lot of candidates (including three that I'm showing here for the first time) and that one of the weaker plays ($) was overrolled made this a somewhat tricky combining operation and evidently I botched it.
I find the easiest nacbrac-combining method (though technically to avoid tiny errors in the margins sometimes creeping in I would need to examine the absolute equities in both files and do the more tedious arithmetic) is to first convert the second line to [U+6 W=Z S8 T17 H25 $27 %32] ~10***7*5, and then combine, which should yield
- [W Z1 U2 S5 $29 T22 H26 %36 c52 e56 &77] ~31***27 25*15 5
In answer to your other question: Yes, it's acceptable to list a candidate play out of its order of rollout strength. To do so is unusual but I had a reason. The alternative is to list the descending number of trials out of order, like this:
- [W Z1 U2 S5 T22 H26 $29 %36 c52 e56 &77] ~31***25*27 15 5
That works out okay in this case, but imagine $ to be (say) .004 stronger -- then it would look like this:
- [W Z1 U2 S5 T22 $25 H26 %36 c52 e56 &77] ~31***25 27 25 15 5
In that example, I had to repeat a two-digit trial number plus add two spaces in lieu of a single asterisk (a difference of three characters). By the same token, if you examine the second nacbrac of this post (based on an actual rollout), moving the $ candidate two places to the right would change the trial-number information from ~10***7*5 to ~10***5*7 5. If more than one weak candidate is overrolled, the trial numbers get increasingly flip-floppy and gangly. That said, it's no big deal either way, but FWIW there's the reason I am in the habit of putting the candidate's strength rather than the trial numbers out of order in these situations; it's the lesser of evils.
Nack