[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bug-gnubg] Bug in bearoffdump?

From: Philippe Michel
Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Bug in bearoffdump?
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 21:53:17 +0100 (CET)
User-agent: Alpine 2.20 (BSF 67 2015-01-07)

On Tue, 3 Jan 2017, Ian Shaw wrote:

The 1-sided database gives the most efficient bearoff by minimising the average rolls required.

The "using normal distribution" 1-sided database that Isambard mentions in other posts does only this, but the regular one has the distributions of rolls needed to bear off (it knows that 0004 bears off in 1 roll 3 times out of 36 and 011011 only once) and should get your example below right.

The 2-sided database plays the cube perfectly (in money games) while using the 1-sided one may lead to errors there. I think a misplay by the 1-sided database would involve a forthcoming double (but I have no example to offer).

Sometimes, this isn't the best play. When the opponent is close to the end, it may necessary to increase the probability to bear off in fewer rolls than your opponent, at the expense of increasing the average rolls required.

For example, consider when you have 2 on the four point, 1 on the five and 1 on the six, and roll 21. If your opponent has the same position as you, then the best play is 4/3 4/2 to bear off in the fewest rolls, on average. If your opponent has all 4 on the one point, then 6/4 5/4 is the best play, so that 66, 55 and 44 all win for you on the next roll. It doesn't help you at all to optimize your chance of bearing off in 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6 rolls, because you'll never get the chance.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]