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

BGonline.org Forums

Woolsey's law and formal logic

Posted By: Stein Kulseth
Date: Thursday, 13 March 2008, at 10:36 a.m.

In Response To: Woolsey's law (PersianLord)

I am sorry but you have got the implication backwards in your derived statement

You have
p: "you are unsure of taking/dropping" and
q: "you should double"
(Substituting "you" for "your opponent" to comply with the original rule wording, as well as the fact that you can only know your own evaluations - not your opponent's)

Then ~q => ~p says: "If you should not double, then you must be sure of taking/dropping", which is obviously equivalent to the original law.

(BTW, I adamantly adheres to the law in practical play, except for gammonish positions at scores which make me not-good-enough while too-good - as discussed elsewhere in the thread)

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.