I like the following concept (see end of post) for playing the bots, but it'sInteresting idea, but wouldn't you be susceptible to making performance errors in your percentage assignments? I suppose you could not let the bot judge you on that.
convoluted and unlikely to catch on.
For me the most likely thing is that it interests nobody who reads
this thread, but I do have a slight chance of gaining the interest of
some others with Bob and Tim being reasonable prospects.
So why am I posting then? Well, I'm looking for a job and I feel I
should be studying C++ over the weekend to help with this, and
bg is a good procrastination strategy.
So after that tedious preamble, I will now describe my (bad) idea.
The idea is that, when playing bots, you can hedge your PR losses by assigning percentages to each play. For example, with an opening 41,
I can say 13/9 6/5 (40%) 24/23 13/9 (40%) 13/8 (20%). Then the error
for the play is marked at 40% of the error for 13/9 6/5, 40% of the error for 24/23 13/9 and 20% of the error for 13/8. (Of course correct moves
have zero error).
The same concept applies to cube actions.
For deciding which move to play, the bot picks randomly among
those with the highest percentages. So, in this case, the bot selects randomly (and uniformly) between 24/23 13/9 and 13/9 6/5 and doesn't
play 13/8.
With this game, a player can mitigate the frustration of obtaining bad luck with the PR by making wrong 50/50 guesses.
With cube actions, the same concept applies and a player can go 50/50 between doubling and holding with the computer deciding randomly.
BTW, even if this post is about as much use as decaffeinated coffee,
the word "mitigate" is a really excellent word (in my opinion).
Paul
On Saturday, May 6, 2023 at 7:54:48 AM UTC-4, peps...@gmail.com wrote:fun out of the game. It's akin to having the players do strength, endurance and agility tests as part of Wimbledon.
I like the following concept (see end of post) for playing the bots, but it's
convoluted and unlikely to catch on.
For me the most likely thing is that it interests nobody who reads
this thread, but I do have a slight chance of gaining the interest of
some others with Bob and Tim being reasonable prospects.
So why am I posting then? Well, I'm looking for a job and I feel I
should be studying C++ over the weekend to help with this, and
bg is a good procrastination strategy.
So after that tedious preamble, I will now describe my (bad) idea.
The idea is that, when playing bots, you can hedge your PR losses by assigning percentages to each play. For example, with an opening 41,
I can say 13/9 6/5 (40%) 24/23 13/9 (40%) 13/8 (20%). Then the error
for the play is marked at 40% of the error for 13/9 6/5, 40% of the error for 24/23 13/9 and 20% of the error for 13/8. (Of course correct moves have zero error).
The same concept applies to cube actions.
For deciding which move to play, the bot picks randomly among
those with the highest percentages. So, in this case, the bot selects randomly (and uniformly) between 24/23 13/9 and 13/9 6/5 and doesn't
play 13/8.
With this game, a player can mitigate the frustration of obtaining bad luck
with the PR by making wrong 50/50 guesses.
With cube actions, the same concept applies and a player can go 50/50 between doubling and holding with the computer deciding randomly.
BTW, even if this post is about as much use as decaffeinated coffee,
the word "mitigate" is a really excellent word (in my opinion).
PaulInteresting idea, but wouldn't you be susceptible to making performance errors in your percentage assignments? I suppose you could not let the bot judge you on that.
I'm not a fan of PR at the single match level, although I do look at it to gauge my progress as a player over time. I particularly don't like the idea of tournaments where there is an award, or something like that, related to PR. It sort of takes the
You might think of PR performance as a measure of endurance in a match, rather than sheer backgammon brawn. The closer you get to the end of the match, the greater the effect on PR of any given error.
Just let the frigging game happen and let people make their own suppositions about who actually had the better backgammon brain on that day. There's more fun in that, IMO.
If, however, they introduce arm wrestling to BG tournaments, I'm all for it. Bob
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 297 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 17:20:42 |
Calls: | 6,667 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 12,216 |
Messages: | 5,336,854 |