BGonline.org Forums

Adjusted match equity

Posted By: Fabrice Liardet
Date: Thursday, 18 November 2010, at 8:58 a.m.

In Response To: Adjusted match equity (Rich Munitz)

I suppose an alternate strategy would be to fill out the 0-away boundaries of the MET (i.e. all 0% and 100%). You could then fill in the n-away, n-away values as predicted by the Elo formula. The RK-MET will have 50% for all of these scores. You could then imagine linearly skewing the RK table for each of the m-away,n-away and the n-away,m-away values between the known n-away,n-away and 0-away,n-away (and n-away,0-away) values.

Nice idea, but the resulting MET will probably be a bit "flat", not capturing the specifics of the special scores. It should be possible to do a little better.

Messages In This Thread

• Adjusted match equity
  Dimitar Draganov -- Tuesday, 16 November 2010, at 1:30 p.m.
  • Adjusted match equity
    Fabrice Liardet -- Tuesday, 16 November 2010, at 3:34 p.m.
    • Adjusted match equity
      Dimitar Draganov -- Tuesday, 16 November 2010, at 4:01 p.m.
      • Adjusted match equity
        Fabrice Liardet -- Thursday, 18 November 2010, at 8:55 a.m.
  • Adjusted match equity
    Petter Bengtsson -- Tuesday, 16 November 2010, at 4:45 p.m.
    • Adjusted match equity
      higonefive -- Tuesday, 16 November 2010, at 5:00 p.m.
    • Adjusted match equity
      Gregg Cattanach -- Thursday, 18 November 2010, at 2:02 p.m.
      • Adjusted match equity
        Maik Stiebler -- Friday, 19 November 2010, at 11:16 p.m.
  • Adjusted match equity
    Rich Munitz -- Tuesday, 16 November 2010, at 6:05 p.m.
    • Adjusted match equity
      Dimitar Draganov -- Tuesday, 16 November 2010, at 7:13 p.m.
    • Adjusted match equity
      Fabrice Liardet -- Thursday, 18 November 2010, at 8:58 a.m.
  • Adjusted match equity
    Fabrice Liardet -- Thursday, 18 November 2010, at 2:52 p.m.