Forum Archive :
Match Equities
Which match equity table is best?
|
I use the Woolsey-Heinrich MET, because I can remember it! Well, almost. I
learnt the 1-away & 2-away values, and use Neil's Numbers for the rest.
http://www.gammonline.com/demo/equity.htm
The most scientific comparison I know of is by Kit Woolsey. GammOnLine
subscribers can check out this discussion by Kit Woolsey.
http://www.gammonline.com/members/Jan01/articles/sneq.htm. Kit writes,
"Snowie assumes a gammon rate of 26%, while for my table I assumed a gammon
rate of about 21%. I agree that Snowie's gammon rate is more accurate in
theory. In practice most backgammon players (even experts) do not play
aggressively enough for a gammon, since they are more concerned about
winning the game. Thus the empirical gammon rate is considerably lower than
Snowie's theoretical rate."
Ian
|
|
Gregg Cattanach writes:
I use the Woolsey table because 1) I believe the gammon rate assumtions are
more valid, and 2) there are several very simple algorithms to compute all
of the ME values in your head. I don't know any method to create Snowie's
numbers with some simple algorithm, and it isn't practical to use Snowie's
numbers which are expressed in 10ths of percentages. Only a trivial number
of people could effectively do 3 digit precision math for ME calculations
in their head. Snowie's tables generally only differ from Woolsey's by
1.5% or less. Granted this can have an effect on a close decision, but
over the board that precision isn't really required.
Btw, my favorite method of coming up with the Woolsey numbers is the Turner
method:
50 + (24/T + 3) * D where T is the number of points the trailer has to go
and D is the differences in scores. This gets to within 1% of the Woolsey
number for all scores up to 11-a, 11-a, except you should at 2% to the
results for 2-a 5-a to 2-a 8-a. Also, you just need to memorize the
Crawford score sequence: 30,25,17,15,10,9,6,5,3,3,2,2,1,1 as the formula
doesn't work for those scores.
Gregg
|
|
|
|
Match Equities
- Constructing a match equity table (Walter Trice, Apr 2000)
- Does it matter which match equity table you use? (Klaus Evers+, Nov 2005)
- 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)
- 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
Recent addition
|
| |
|