| |
BGonline.org Forums
Misreply analysis for opening 32
Posted By: Nack Ballard In Response To: Misreply analysis for opening 32 (Petter Bengtsson)
Date: Sunday, 27 June 2010, at 11:31 p.m.
Thanks, Petter! I forgot to log that for 32Z-51, R and S are exactly tied, so XG3's and XG4's 32Z-51S are actually non-errors. The two reply errors from Snowie I found plus the assorted errors from other bots you found are listed below, along with their (agg) error sizes:
GNU
32D: 32S (.010), 43Z (.012), 51S (.004)
32S: 53S (.009)
32Z: 21H (.002)XG 3-ply
32D: 33A (.014), 41S (.022), 51S (.004)
32Z: 32X (.008)XG 4-ply
32D: 51S (.004)
32Z: 32X (.008)Snowie
32D: 33E (.028), 51S (.004)Dividing the non-doublet errors by 18 and the doublet errors by 36, the effects of the errors against each opening roll, and by bot, are:
32D: Gnu .0014, XG3 .0018, XG4 .0002, Snw .0010
32S: Gnu .0005
32Z: Gnu .0001, XG3 .0004, XG4 .0004However, David said (regarding Gnu misreplies), My list doesn't agree exactly with Petter's list. So, I'll hold off on final conclusions for now.
David, please list Gnu's misreplies (those that don't match the list below) in a format similar to that of Petter's "GNU 2-ply" table here.
32D: 11N 21$ 22N 31P 32ZD 33C 41$ 42P 43D 44B 51$ 52S 53P 54H 55P 61P 62S 63H 64H 65R 66B
32S: 11P 21X 22N 31P 32H 33B 41X 42P 43H 44C 51S 52H 53P 54H 55A 61P 62X 63H 64H 65R 66B
32Z: 11e 21S 22N 31P 32K 33A 41U 42P 43X 44B 51RS 52S 53P 54H 55A 61P 62S 63H 64H 65R 66BI'm comparing the misreplies to "agg" (the aggregate of all three bot's rollout results). I have a hunch that, in doing the math, you used Gnu rollout results as arbiter.
Nack
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.