|
BGonline.org Forums
GnuBG rollouts' slot bias
Posted By: Nack Ballard In Response To: 65R-41 4 ply rollout (Bob Koca)
Date: Monday, 3 May 2010, at 7:33 a.m.
The long gnu RO's here have $ better by .0084 for 65R-41 and better by .0060 for 65R - 51. Is it reasonable to assume that the XG rollout will also make splitting relatively better by about .085 putting S in the lead for 51 reply? How about for 21 reply, will split also catch up by about .0085 (leaving $ still best by a decent amount)?
I have no XG rollout results for (the non-close) 65R-21, and none for 65R-51 other than those posted by Stick (3-ply) and Neil (4-ply). As for 65R-41, I recently posted all I have here.
I've combined the data for those three positions into this single post, and streamlined it to focus on just the S and $ plays for money:
65R-21:
Snowie .. [$ S22] 15k
GnuBG .. [$ 30.4] 5k65R-51:
Snowie .. [S $3] 31k
GnuBG .. [$ S6] 31k
XG 3-ply [S $1] 15k
XG 4-ply [$=S] 46k65R-41:
Snowie .. [$ S1] 20k
GnuBG .. [$ S8.4] 31k
XG 3-ply [S $9] 15k
XG 4-ply [S $1] 46kComparing to the rollout results of Snowie, Gnu’s results are slottier by 8.4, 9.0 and 9.4 (thousandths) for 65R-21, 65R-51 and 65R-41, respectively.
There is less data for XG/Gnu comparison. Gnu is slottier by 7.0 and 17.4 than XG 3-ply (relative margin inconsistency here could be due in part to variance in only 15k trials), and Gnu is slottier by 6.0 and 7.4 than 4-ply, for 65R-51 and 65R-41, respectively.
I’ve been harping on Gnu’s slot bias (in rollout results) for a long time. David Rockwell has done analysis supporting our theories; for example, he has demonstrated that Gnu misplays its replies to opening 21 by an average of .006+ against 21$ but by only .001 against 21S (whereas I believe Snowie’s errors were relatively small and balanced). There is probably more going on as well, given that Gnu is [$ S19] 92k; compare to Snowie [$ S8] 80k, XG 3-ply [$ S5.5] 140k, and XG 4-ply [$ S4] 24k.
Nack
|
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.