| |
BGonline.org Forums
Nacbracs
Posted By: Nack Ballard In Response To: Nacbracs (Matt Ryder)
Date: Sunday, 27 December 2009, at 6:58 p.m.
I agree with everything you said. I find it helps me improve to examine relative margins for a range of plays more so than knowing which of two plays is best by a hair.
While I share the popular urge to know that for opening 43, D is .002 (or whatever it ultimately turns out to be) better than Z, because the situation arises so frequently, and cheer the rollout onwards to 46k or 62k, at the same time I roll out plays in the blunder category to at least 5k (and trunc plays even weaker than that) that other experts don't bother, and I prefer to see at least 25k of plays around -.01, 15k around -.02, etc., rather than seeing the seemingly typical practice of 46k+ of the top two plays and 5k or nothing for everything else.
The problem with writing nacbracs in hundredths or quasi-hundredths is that it is in direct conflict with writing them in thousandths. If you write [$=U S2 D3], others will interpret that as all four plays being in the tight end of the tied (.000 to -.010) category, whereas what you mean is that the first two plays are tied, the third play is in the close (-.020 to -.030) category and the fourth play is in the mistake (-.030 to -.060) category. [I know you've already grasped this problem -- I mainly inserted this paragraph to make it easier for others to follow the discussion.]
For that reason, I think if you are going to combine nacbracs with the Ballard/Weaver error scale, it would be better to use
t = tied (or connect the top plays with an = sign)
v = very close
c = close
m = mistake
b = blunder
w = whopperThat way, when you write [$=U Sc Dm], someone merely won't understand what you mean (unless/until he is willing to learn your nacBW-dialect), rather than the worse problem of misinterpreting [$=U S2 D3] due to familiarity of using thousandths in the mainstream system.
I actually experimented with the lower case tvcmbw letters (mostly at the top of data docs for a quick overview) a while back and it worked fine. Like you, I would have slightly preferred using numerals to letters (for the offset), but I found it didn't make much difference -- it's easy to get used to the letter "mishmash."
For yourself, you could write it both ways (without any chance of misinterpretation) and see which one "grabs" you. Based on what you've told me, I suspect you'll like tvsmbw better than thousandths, but you might find that you want to be fluent in both for purposes of communication with others. If you wrote [$=U S20 D30] and warned you were rounding down to the nearest 10, others could at least relate to the numbers. And when they write [$ U3 D28 U34], you could note it to yourself as [$=U S20 D30] and/or [$=U Sc Dm]. Or you could leave it at [$ U3 D28 U34] if you feel it is one of those times you are interested in the extra accuracy.
Nack
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.