TY,right- concerning your 1-st remark. The main thrust for me at the beginning was to understand why breaking pt. 4 is worse then breaking pt. 9 or 8-that is settled. That's why I cherry picked some "garbage" candidates. A fuller RO follows- and I think I like 8/7,8/6 better now as my first choice (3 builders vs 2, only 9 numbers run). Strangely my RO results differ (even with same parameters) from Bruce's ( I used XG 1?)
1. | Rollout1 | 9/6 | eq: +0.087 |
| Player: Opponent: | 52.76% (G:6.22% B:0.24%) 47.24% (G:21.23% B:2.19%) | Conf: ± 0.017 (+0.070...+0.104) Duration: 10 minutes 48 seconds |
|
2. | Rollout1 | 8/7 8/6 | eq: +0.070 (-0.017) |
| Player: Opponent: | 50.13% (G:6.14% B:0.21%) 49.87% (G:12.74% B:0.96%) | Conf: ± 0.015 (+0.055...+0.085) Duration: 8 minutes 04 seconds |
|
3. | Rollout1 | 8/5 | eq: +0.042 (-0.045) |
| Player: Opponent: | 51.43% (G:6.11% B:0.23%) 48.57% (G:21.94% B:2.28%) | Conf: ± 0.017 (+0.025...+0.059) Duration: 11 minutes 19 seconds |
|
4. | Rollout1 | 9/8 9/7 | eq: +0.019 (-0.068) |
| Player: Opponent: | 48.92% (G:6.14% B:0.25%) 51.08% (G:14.01% B:0.93%) | Conf: ± 0.016 (+0.003...+0.035) Duration: 6 minutes 43 seconds |
|
5. | Rollout1 | 5/2 | eq: -0.025 (-0.112) |
| Player: Opponent: | 51.29% (G:6.71% B:0.26%) 48.71% (G:20.65% B:2.05%) | Conf: ± 0.015 (-0.040...-0.010) Duration: 9 minutes 15 seconds |
|
6. | Rollout1 | 4/2 4/3* | eq: -0.066 (-0.153) |
| Player: Opponent: | 50.44% (G:6.35% B:0.21%) 49.56% (G:19.63% B:1.91%) | Conf: ± 0.021 (-0.087...-0.045) Duration: 11 minutes 03 seconds |
|
|
1 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction. Moves and cube decisions: 3 ply
|
eXtreme Gammon Version: 1.21, MET: Rockwell-Kazaross