[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums

41$-44 3Ply play - 4Ply cube vs 3Ply

Posted By: neilkaz
Date: Friday, 1 January 2010, at 5:35 p.m.

In Response To: 41$-44 3Ply play - 4Ply cube vs 3Ply (Nack Ballard)

"Any thoughts, Neil? Is it worth rolling out 41$-44 on XG 4p/3c to see what happens?"

Nack

The difference in results here is certainly interesting so if Ken wants to do that, it might help complete the puzzle. I note that Ken's 3/3 RO took much more time than his 3/4 RO which seems odd, unless he had other things (GNU or another XG) running at the same time.

Ken did RO 3/3 for both double and no double so perhaps that was slowing things?

We see that with 3 ply XG play the attacking side is clearly doing better with both plays than with 4 ply play (perhaps 4 ply better handles the defensive positions with 4 checkers back that rountinely result?) 2 ply GNU also has both plays doing better than 3 ply XG.

We now can see that it likely isn't differences between 3 and 4 ply XG cube that account for the results.

A 4/3 RO would be interesting, but I'd make sure to unclick "RO for double and no double" so that it correlates with my 4/4 RO.

Anyhow, my opinion is that using the highest possible playing strength is most likely to generate the most believable result. However, when you have a situation where there's often a quick cube, like 41$44 then if one ply setting is making cube errors and the other isn't...well..the end results could be rather inaccurate.

If and when there's capability to use XGR+ for RO, we can expect 41$44 to get a week+ of my computer time.

.. neilkaz ..

Messages In This Thread

 

Post Response
Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:
Subject:
Message:

If necessary, enter your password below:

Password:
 

 

[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.