| |
BGonline.org Forums
What is XG Thinking here?
Posted By: David Presser In Response To: What is XG Thinking here? (Dmitriy Obukhov)
Date: Sunday, 14 September 2014, at 5:42 a.m.
I think that I understand your question a bit better and have a possible answer if that is what you are looking for. This is more theoretical oriented question in my view.
I would first ask myself why is the 42P-C a dbl in the first place? This is supposed to be the non-intuitive cube action. The answer is a game theory approach where you look at the cube action recursively (solve it backwards) and I will use a simplifying example. After 42P and assuming that I don't dbl this roll, on the next roll my opponent will either: 1. dbl and I have a take; 2. due to a joker on my side my opponent is reluctant to double such that I am a favorite and my opponent is facing this same dilema while being the underdog. Given the two options, it is clearly better for me to double now despite being an underdog. This is a finite chain of events that solving recursively leads to dbling on the first roll and the equity for ND should equal the equity for D ATS.
Having said that, it could be that 52S-C is different in the sense that according to XG++ there is no market loser and I am the favorite before rolling in terms of win%. Yes, my opponent will next face the game theory dilemma of whether to cube while being the underdog, but I am not sure whether XG++ evaluation is taking this into account. I think not because otherwise, it would be reflected in the equity and be a double.
I believe this is correct for the weakest opening sequences which lead to the side on roll to be the favorite in terms of win%. 51 and 52 openings come to mind.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.