| |
BGonline.org Forums
Best online data source for studying opening replies?
Posted By: Matt Ryder In Response To: Best online data source for studying opening replies? (Rich Munitz)
Date: Wednesday, 23 December 2009, at 5:27 a.m.
Why does there need to be a single best source? Is there a reason why you can't get your information from two sites?
Four reasons:
1. I'd prefer not to build a Frankenstein's quilt of data where the underlying methodologies, bots, rollout settings etc differ from case to case. I intend to devote substantial effort to studying and memorising the results, and I want to feel like I'm comparing apples with apples when I'm doing so.
2. Stick's not the only lazy mfer. Manually updating thousands of lines of data is a huge task.
3. Where there's a significant difference, Stick occasionally offers conflicting Snowie and Gnu results. Do I just arbitrarily choose between them?
4. It seems from recent discussions that XG's rollouts are overturning many of the previous Snowie/Gnu results. Would I not be better off doing my own XG analysis (or waiting for others to post this :-)?
No - you can't just blindly take money rollouts and extrapolate the results for GG and expect them to be correct at GG. You need to roll it out at GG because the play choices made in the rollouts could be very different at GG. But if throwing out such a result leaves you with nothing, the flawed extrapolated result seems clearly preferable to just blindly making the money play.
I'm not sure it follows that learning reams of flawed extrapolations is better than not learning anything at all. After all, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
And when better information becomes available, switch then.
I find "unlearning" bad lessons is orders of magnitude harder than learning fresh lessons.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.