BGonline.org Forums

The 102% oxymoron

Posted By: Bob Koca
Date: Wednesday, 21 December 2016, at 4:41 p.m.

In Response To: The 102% oxymoron (mamabear)

I suspect you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the variance reduction technique. Or maybe I do. In the following situation I believe that the luck adjustment will say B is the better player. But from your earlier post it seems you think that that luck adjustment will say A is the better player. Have I understood correctly what you were saying in the previous post?

Suppose that players A and B play matches repeatedly. They both play the checkers perfectly. Player A also offers cubes theoretically perfectly and player B takes or drops theoretically perfectly. Player A though takes literally every cube that is offered, even if the game is gin. Player B knows that and adjusts cube actions to take advantage of that fact by waiting to double until the game is gin or in some circumstances could end on his roll.

Messages In This Thread

• The 102% oxymoron
  gudgen -- Sunday, 18 December 2016, at 2:08 p.m.
  • The 102% oxymoron
    mamabear -- Monday, 19 December 2016, at 12:25 p.m.
    • The 102% oxymoron
      Chuck Bower -- Monday, 19 December 2016, at 11:13 p.m.
    • The 102% oxymoron
      Bob Koca -- Monday, 19 December 2016, at 11:40 p.m.
      • The 102% oxymoron
        mamabear -- Tuesday, 20 December 2016, at 6:42 p.m.
        • The 102% oxymoron
          Bob Koca -- Wednesday, 21 December 2016, at 4:41 p.m.
          • The 102% oxymoron
            mamabear -- Wednesday, 21 December 2016, at 8:51 p.m.
            • +1 *NM*
              gudgen -- Friday, 23 December 2016, at 12:21 a.m.
            • 102% oxymoron
              Bob Koca -- Friday, 23 December 2016, at 2:25 a.m.
              • 102% oxymoron
                mamabear -- Friday, 23 December 2016, at 12:45 p.m.
    • The 102% oxymoron
      mamabear -- Friday, 23 December 2016, at 12:42 p.m.