This is a reply to Tim’s post. I am putting it here—instead of in direct reply to Tim—because this thread is already nested way too deeply! A little vertical alignment (in tree view) may help.
Thanks for catching my error. Indeed, I did mean 24/21 7/4*(2) 4/1.
In case there are any developers reading this, I want to link the post by Tom Keith that you cited. Tom presents a comprehensive set of guidelines that would standardize the way moves are formatted.
When I pointed out to Tom that both GnuBg and XG list “to” points in descending order, he suggested that, “Maybe rule 5 should be changed to read: ... then in descending order by the to points ...” By the way, I just noticed a small error in Tom’s rule number 5. Tom gives this example:
If there is tie, put the multipart move first.
13/7, 13/10*/7 → 13/10*/7, 13/7
This move is a parallel move, and is more elegantly written as 13/10*/7(2). Some may argue that only the first checker off the 13pt makes a hit, and therefore suggest that 13/10*/7 13/7 is preferable, but they will never sell me on the idea! Indeed, what if the hit were on the 7pt as in 63S-33P = 13/7*(2). Is there anyone who will argue that that should be written 13/7* 13/7?
The following rollout of opening 43 shows that XG presents moves in descending order of “to” points. Two down from the midpoint is written as 13/10 13/9. There is no right and wrong here, but since both XG and GnuBg do it this way, I have adpoted the same style for the Nactation Key in my RolloutSummary spreadsheet. Given the precedent, I think you and Tom would concur with my choice.
Without declaring anything to be right or wrong, let me agree with you that any hits need to appear in a move sequence at the earliest opportunity (reading left to right). I don’t like 24/21 7/1 7/4* because the move 7/1 must hit en passant. My preference for this move is 24/21 7/4* 7/1. If I were listing “to” points in ascending order, I would write 24/21 7/4*/1 7/4, even though it sacrifices elegance.
There is a corresponding inelegance that occurs when “to” points are listed in descending order. Consider a roll of 44 which is played 13/1, 9/5, and which hits on the 5pt. In order to get the hit in the right place, this must be written as 13/5*/1 9/5 rather than 13/1 9/5*.
Mike
                      |
| ||||
| XGID=-b----E-C---eE---c-e----B-:0:0:1:43:0:0:0:0:10 | |||||
| Blue to play 43 | |||||
| 1. | Book1 | 13/10 13/9 | eq: +0.0071 | |||
| ||||||
| 2. | Book1 | 24/21 13/9 | eq: +0.0064 (-0.0007) | |||
| ||||||
| 3. | Book1 | 24/20 13/10 | eq: +0.0000 (-0.0071) | |||
| ||||||
| 4. | Book1 | 24/21 24/20 | eq: -0.0154 (-0.0225) | |||
| ||||||
| 1 Generated by Arthur van Houdt on 3/19/2012 using eXtreme Gammon 2.00 46656 Games rolled with Variance Reduction. Dice Seed: 1 Moves and cube decisions: 4-ply | ||||||
eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10