| |
BGonline.org Forums
XG: What is the meaning of "Total cost" and "Should have won"?
Posted By: Maik Stiebler In Response To: XG: What is the meaning of "Total cost" and "Should have won"? (sita)
Date: Thursday, 7 March 2019, at 9:37 a.m.
In principle, luck adjustment is unbiased. "Should have won" looks to me like a good enough implementation of luck adjustment. If it is, we should not expect the observed win percentage to be below the "should have won" in the long run (assuming we are looking at an unbiased sample of matches with good random dice rolls). I am not sure what Christian means by "Hard to catch up skewed matches".
I won 192. But I should have won 215.2
That does look suspicious. But there are some pitfalls you can fall into when using "should have won" especially for manually transcribed matches. For example, you might have checked "Do not calculate resign errors" and think that you are now free to shorten the transcription by an artificial resign at any point in a boring bear-off. But "should have won" is luck-based, not error-based. Resign errors are always relevant in "should have won". Or you might sometimes "cure" an illegal play in the transcription by entering a fitting dice roll, if you are sure it does not affect the error analysis. But it will affect the luck analysis, although it is hard to see how that could lead to a long term bias.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.