However, I now think this is wrong. Here is what I could do to
guarantee myself a > 5% probability. Suppose I reach a bad position
but with solid 10% game-wining chances. I could then double XG
and we could keep doubling and redoubling each other until the cube
value was more than the length of the match. My probability of winning
the match then becomes 10%. The doubling and redoubling ad infinitum
suits both sides -- XG because it is wrongly assuming an optimal opponent, and myself because I'm only looking for > 5% MWC.
On 10/11/2022 9:01 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
However, I now think this is wrong. Here is what I could do toHey, you've rediscovered what Murat has been preaching all
guarantee myself a > 5% probability. Suppose I reach a bad position
but with solid 10% game-wining chances. I could then double XG
and we could keep doubling and redoubling each other until the cube
value was more than the length of the match. My probability of winning
the match then becomes 10%. The doubling and redoubling ad infinitum
suits both sides -- XG because it is wrongly assuming an optimal opponent, and myself because I'm only looking for > 5% MWC.
these decades!
Whether your numbers are correct, I don't know, but the principle
is sound. This is why Murat was trying so hard, at one point in time,
to get people to take his bet that he could outperform what the
"standard formulas" for winning chances (based on PR) predicted. He
thought that a successful performance would finally demonstrate to
people that PR is nonsense.
I told him that people already understood this principle and so he
wouldn't be proving anything people didn't already know. I suggested
that he instead bet that he could beat XG more than 50% of the time
in short matches (say, 7 points). Of course he got angry, because he
knew he couldn't do that, but didn't want to come out and admit it.
On October 11, 2022 at 2:15:14 PM UTC+1, Tim Chow wrote:
On 10/11/2022 9:01 AM, peps...@gmail.com wrote:
However, I now think this is wrong. Here is what I could do to
guarantee myself a >5% probability. Suppose I reach a bad
position but with solid 10% game-wining chances. I could then
double XG and we could keep doubling and redoubling each
other until the cube value was more than the length of the
match. My probability of winning the match then becomes 10%.
The doubling and redoubling ad infinitum suits both sides --
XG because it is wrongly assuming an optimal opponent,
and myself because I'm only looking for >5% MWC.
Hey, you've rediscovered what Murat has been preaching all
these decades!
Whether your numbers are correct, I don't know, but the principle
is sound. This is why Murat was trying so hard, at one point in
time, to get people to take his bet that he could outperform what
the "standard formulas" for winning chances (based on PR)
predicted. He thought that a successful performance would
finally demonstrate to people that PR is nonsense.
I told him that people already understood this principle and so
he wouldn't be proving anything people didn't already know.
I suggested that he instead bet that he could beat XG more than
50% of the time in short matches (say, 7 points).
Of course he got angry,
because he knew he couldn't do that, but didn't want to come out
and admit it.
Assuming my PR is 6, and assuming a match of more than 1000 is
impractical, what is the largest p such that some match length <=
1000 exists such that my probability of losing to XG is at least p?
What would your estimate for p be? I'll go with 80% but it's just a
wild guess.
I told him that people already understood this principle and so
he wouldn't be proving anything people didn't already know.
You made that claim without offering any evidence for it, solely to
steal away the originality of my arguments from me.
You better hang on to your wild guess. ;) I don't think Tim is capable
of answering such questions.
MK
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 297 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 16:28:13 |
Calls: | 6,667 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 12,216 |
Messages: | 5,336,762 |