How would Senk and Nack do today?
Posted By: phil simborg
Date: Wednesday, 11 June 2014, at 5:40 p.m.
SOME BACKGAMMON HISTORY:
"In 1997 Malcolm Davis initiated a contest by inviting two of the world's best human players, Nack Ballard and Mike Senkiewicz, to Texas to play against Jellyfish3.0. Human players put up their own money and Harvey Huie backed Jellyfish. Ballard and Senkiewicz were not teamed up, so actually there were two independent tests. Dice were human rolled to remove any concern that JF's generated dice were less than random. Each contest consisted of 300 independent money games. Coincidentally, Jellyfish finished dead even, beating Senkiewicz by 58 points and losing an identical amount to Ballard. JF's creator, statistician Fredrik Dahl, was quick to point out that a 58 point win in a 300 game sample is insufficient to conclude superiority. Ballard's win and Senkiewicz's loss were only significant at around one standard devition each -- not particularly meaningiful. Taken together, clearly neither the human race nor the droids could even hint at having an edge." --From an article by Chuck Bower
Just a guess...how would Senk and Nack do today against XG? No doubt XG is much better than JF was back then, but so are Senk and Nack.
Is there anyone here willing to bet against XG? And if not Senk and Nack, how about the best money players in the world today (which is probably not the same as the top of the Giant's list, in my opinion). And that raises another question: who would you take for the top money player in the world. It's not an easy question because we can't quantify the answer...only by reputation, and also, one player might be a great money player, but not so great at $5,000 a point playing with his own money.
I have heard that Abe the Snake and Slava have to be high on that list, but you would have to also consider Wells, Falafel, Nack, Malcolm, Gus, Sander, and Rocky Kaya.
Who else would you consider?
Messages In This Thread
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.