|
Forum Archive :
Match Equities
Does it matter which match equity table you use?
|
|
At the moment I'm doing a large simualtion on different mets. I let gnubg
play against itself 5p matches via socket. 3000 between woolsey and snowie
are nearly finished with no significant difference.
Ciao
Achim
|
|
|
Robert-Jan Veldhuizen writes:
Interesting! I think Joseph Heled did something similar once and found
some MET to win ~50.03% (?) against some other MET. For overall match
winning chances, there's hardly anything to be gained by using a
better ("perfect" even) MET than f.i. the Woolsey MET (which, at least
for GNUBG 0-ply playing itself, seems to be worse than the SW 2.1,
Jacobs or mec26 MET. Zadeh is probably worst).
So a better MET seems to increase match winning chances by a very tiny
amount only. The number of decisions in f.i. a 5pt match where using a
different MET will lead to a different decision is very low, and even
when it happens the supposedly inferior MET would often give up only a
tiny amount of equity.
For individual positions, mainly cube decisions, it can occasionaly
make a significant difference though which MET you use.
I'm almost done (recursively) building a custom "GNUBG" MET upto 7
points, that is solely based on GNUBG full rollouts of the opening
position (0-ply play, 2-ply 100%/25% cube). It's closest to the Jacobs
MET it seems, and pretty close to SW 2.1 and mec26, but with a few
small interesting differences. It's in very close agreement with the
Kazaross-Shaw MET (which is finished upto 4-away 4-away now and uses a
similar but more rigorous method).
I'll post it here when it's done (only 6-away 7-away left to be rolled
out).
Zorba
|
|
|
|
Match Equities
- Constructing a match equity table (Walter Trice, Apr 2000)
- Does it matter which match equity table you use? (Klaus Evers+, Nov 2005)
![[GammOnLine forum]](pics/GammOnLine.gif)
- Does it matter which match equity table you use? (Achim Mueller+, Dec 2003)
- Does it matter which match equity table you use? (Chuck Bower+, Sept 2001)
![[Long message]](pics/Long.gif)
- ME Table: Big Brother (Peter Fankhauser, July 1996)
- ME Table: Dunstan (Ian Dunstan+, Aug 2004)
- ME Table: Escoffery (David Escoffery, Nov 1991)
- ME Table: Friedman (Elliott C Winslow, Oct 1991)
- ME Table: Kazaross (Neil Kazaross, Dec 2003)
- ME Table: Kazaross-XG2 (neilkaz, Aug 2011)
- ME Table: Rockwell-Kazaross (Chuck Bower+, June 2010)
- ME Table: Snowie (Chase, Apr 2002)
- ME Table: Snowie (Harald Retter, Aug 1998)
- ME Table: Woolsey (Raccoon, Apr 2006)
- ME Table: Woolsey (Kit Woolsey, May 1994)
- ME Table: Woolsey (William R. Tallmadge, Jan 1994)
- ME Table: Zadeh (Jørn Thyssen, Mar 2004)
- ME Table: Zorba (Robert-Jan Veldhuizen+, Dec 2003)
- ME at 1-away/2-away (crawford) (Fabrice Liardet+, Nov 2007)
- ME at 1-away/2-away (crawford) (Ian Shaw+, Apr 2003)
- Match equities--an alternate view (Durf Freund, Oct 1994)
- Neil's new numbers (neilkaz, Aug 2011)
- Neil's numbers (Kit Woolsey+, Oct 1994)
- On calculating match equity tables (Neil Kazaross, July 2004)
- Turner formula (Gregg Cattanach, Feb 2003)
- Turner formula (Stephen Turner, June 1994)
- Using a match equity table (Michael J. Zehr, June 1992)
- Value of free drop (Neil Kazaross, Oct 2002)
- Which match equity table is best? (Martin Krainer+, Oct 2003)
- Which match equity table is best? (Ian Shaw+, Dec 2001)
- Why use a match equity table? (Kit Woolsey, Feb 1999)
- Worth memorizing? (Alef Rosenbaum+, Feb 2003)
From GammOnLine
Long message
![[Recommended reading]](pics/Star2.gif) Recommended reading
![[Recent addition]](pics/New.gif) Recent addition
|
| |
|
