tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4886491474303385529.post8922606276382740006..comments2023-04-22T09:22:21.628-07:00Comments on the dorbel daily: The Major Split, Right Or Wrong?dorbelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13383981659478145403noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4886491474303385529.post-71354537346733815642012-05-22T04:28:12.415-07:002012-05-22T04:28:12.415-07:00Of course it is, thanks.Of course it is, thanks.dorbelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13383981659478145403noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4886491474303385529.post-27382957402252413202012-05-21T13:45:57.987-07:002012-05-21T13:45:57.987-07:00Isn't it Emanuel Lasker?Isn't it Emanuel Lasker?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4886491474303385529.post-15942735867237094832012-05-14T16:46:31.376-07:002012-05-14T16:46:31.376-07:00I believe that boop is far too optimistic in think...I believe that boop is far too optimistic in thinking that it would be easy to program a bot to analyze its opponent's play on the fly and adjust accordingly. It's true that it would not be hard for a bot to estimate its opponent's error rate on the fly and swap in an asymmetric MET. But this would usually not cause the bot to hold the cube very long at 2-away/2-away.<br /><br />Getting computers to analyze human play and adjust accordingly would, in my opinion, be a wonderful advance in bot technology, as I suggested <a href="http://www.bgonline.org/forums/webbbs_config.pl?read=121548" rel="nofollow">recently</a> on the BGOnline forum. But Xavier Dufaure de Citres, the programmer of eXtreme Gammon, said that this would be a <a href="http://www.bgonline.org/forums/webbbs_config.pl?read=121558" rel="nofollow">VERY complex</a> problem. And Xavier probably knows as much as anyone on the planet about programming backgammon bots.Timothy Chowhttp://alum.mit.edu/www/tchownoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4886491474303385529.post-91103357407136314352012-05-12T00:42:41.344-07:002012-05-12T00:42:41.344-07:00The split is a reasonable alternate and I should h...The split is a reasonable alternate and I should have mentioned that. My rollout of 2592 has it inferior by 0.021, which is well within the confidence interval and this is certainly not enough for me to say that 13/10, 11/5 is "clear". I think it is probably right though. Thanks for pointing that out clem.dorbelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13383981659478145403noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4886491474303385529.post-56516155000651249482012-05-11T11:42:35.253-07:002012-05-11T11:42:35.253-07:00The best play is clear, 13/10, 11/5 ...
Is it? M...<i>The best play is clear, 13/10, 11/5 ...</i><br /><br />Is it? My play was 24/21 11/5.<br /><br />My take on the position is that making the five point is mandatory and it's good to have a spare on the 8, so 11/5 is clear. <br />Making the 5 by playing off the 8 strips the 8 point and gives the blot on the 11 no direct chance to make a homeboard point.<br /><br /> Then the choice is to bring one down form the middle or split with the 3. After reading your recent diatribes about the virtues of early splitting I opted for that. Plus, the split puts pressure on white's slotted 5 point.<br /><br />XG 3 ply rollout of 1296 games has the two plays within the margin of error. I'm not sure which is actually better - it's close enough that I don't sweat it.ah_clemnoreply@blogger.com