| |
BGonline.org Forums
Why all the mathematicians favor VRR/MWC tournaments over PR tournaments
Posted By: Timothy Chow
Date: Wednesday, 9 January 2013, at 12:35 a.m.
Everyone I know who really understands the difference between a tournament in which the player with the lower PR (or ER) wins and a tournament in which the player who throws away less MWC wins (or, almost equivalently, the player with the better variance-reduced result wins) favors MWC over PR. Nevertheless, people continue to consider PR tournaments to be a viable option. I can only conclude that many people still don't understand the difference. So I will try once again to explain why MWC makes more sense than PR in this context.
Rather than try to explain in full detail—an approach that has been tried in the past and has failed, because people's eyes glaze over—I'll try focusing on a simple example. Say you're considering doubling. You know that your PR will skyrocket if you double, but you're also nearly certain that your opponent will drop, and more than compensate for your doubling "error." Should you double?
Surely—surely!—common sense dictates that doubling is the correct decision in this scenario. And surely—surely!—any way of scoring the tournament that incentivizes you to hold the cube is distorting the way the game ought to be played. And PR scoring does exactly that. It puts the skilled player in a quandary: Do you use all your skill to your best advantage in order to win your match, or do you instead sacrifice some winning chances in order to get a better score?
With MWC scoring, the problem vanishes into thin air. You simply try to win the match.
Clear enough? So let's put it to a vote.
— All in favor of a scoring system that rewards skill and incentivizes players to play to win, say "aye."
— All in favor of a PR scoring system that distorts the game and constantly puts players in a quandary, say "nay."
Do the ayes have it?
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.