eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10 Note: This position was posted by Ken today. In a rollout, XG is not likely to beaver itself. For the purpose of making a no-Jacoby rollout, therefore, allowing beavers is essentially the same thing as disallowing them. The possibility that beavers may be allowed, however, is forcing me to rethink my database design. Heretofore, I have been treating all no-Jacoby rollouts equally. They have all had their move sequences suffixed by -n. By this method, for instance, the move sequence for the position above becomes 53P-52D-63S-62-n. I have then linked any no-Jacoby rollout, beavers or otherwise, to its corresponding no-Jacoby move sequence. This introduces subtle errors in my data by linking no-Jacoby rollouts where beavers are allowed to no-Jacoby move sequences where the XGID does not allow beavers. Before I modify my database design, I would like have a disscussion whether the -n suffix should be defined to refer only to the no-Jacoby, no-beaver situation that exists in normal-match-score (NMS) rollouts. Perhaps -n could be redefined to mean NMS, and -b introduced to mean no-Jacoby, beavers allowed. When the suffix is omitted, or the -m suffix is used, the meaning would still be Jacoby/beavers allowed. Perhaps -j could mean Jacoby/no beavers. See the table below.
What do you think? Mike | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
