Efe, Correct, that only happens when the cube has already been turned. The tutor doesn't inform about the mistake nor mark the move with yellow.
Joaquin 2009/3/18 <[email protected]> > Dear Christian, Joaquín, Max, > > I just stumbled again upon a faulty "Too Good To Double" tutor error during > one of my matches against Gnubg. > > Attached is the match file for your observation - I occured during Game 5. > I knew it was too good to double anyway, but tried it just to see whether > the tutor was going to stop me against committing this mistake. According to > the anaysis pane, it was a blunder of 0.764 points magnitude marked with a > big yellow!!! Obviously, Gnubg dropped it... > > I guess you can open the same file with your own Gnubg and then continue > Game 5 from the Redouble move onwards. Please inform me how the match > continues for you? Does the tutor warn you against the move or does it just > go ahead with your decision just to let Gnubg pass the cube? > > I am now wondering with suspect, whether the tutor is not functioning > correctly for "Too Good To Double" *when the cube is already turned*??? Anyone > wanna comment on this?? > > Kind Regards, > > Efe > > > > > > --- On *Sat, 14/3/09, [email protected] <[email protected]>*wrote: > > > From: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Problems with Gnubg 04-Mar-2009 release > To: "Christian Anthon" <[email protected]>, "Joaquín Koifman" < > [email protected]>, "Massimiliano Maini" <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Date: Saturday, 14 March, 2009, 11:36 AM > > Dear Christian, Joaquín and all, > > I have some further diagnosis and observations since yesterday that I would > like to share with you upon Joaquín's request: > > 8) I realize now that my older version (Sep-08) is analyzing the match > "on-the-go" [player0, analysis and evaluation settings in both versions all > set as checker play="supremo", cube play= "worldclass", tutor decision="same > as evaluation"]. What I mean with this is that when I for example make a > very lucky, very unlucky, doubtful, bad, very bad move etc, I immediately > see its effects (bold, italics, colored etc.) in the "Game Record" panel > after I confirm my move by clicking on the dice. > > On the other hand, the newer version (Mar-09) does not do this "on-the-go" > analysis right after the move. All comments (bold, italics, bad, very bad, > lucky, unlucky etc.) only appear in the "Game Record" panel, if and only if > you perform a full analysis of the match afterwards. In addition, the > missing "delta equity" for each move with respect to the average dice roll > in the parenthesis also appears surprisingly after the analysis! > > This is basically the reason why it is taking so short for the older > version to analyze the match (since it is just analyzing gnubg's moves - > half the work!), whereas the newer version starts everything from scratch. I > double-checked the settings for everything and can assure you that they are > the same. Does this mean anything to you? Do you encounter the same problem? > Is it in anyway related to an already addressed error? > > A) After Joaquín's request, I tried to artificially create some "Too Good > To Double" positions by using the edit mode. He is right - I could not see > the problem at least in these examples anymore with Mar-09 version - maybe > this problem also depended on the match scores when I encountered them in > the past? > > Therefore, I assume for now that the Tutor works fine with the newer > version regarding "Too Good To Double" decisions. If I ever encounter a > similar error in the future during any of my matches, I will same the game > and forward it as a concrete evidence for your inspection. > > C) As I wrote in my original mail, those cases were *definitely* wins or > losses for Gnubg and its equity was already probably -1.000 or +1.000. So > Joaquín's argument makes sense. Since all possible moves are having the same > equity value at that instant, Gnubg cannot differentiate between them and > probably picks "any random" one amongst them. That's the only reasonable > explanation for it. > > Kind Regards & Nice Weekend to all! > > Efe > > > --- On *Fri, 13/3/09, Joaquín Koifman <[email protected]>* wrote: > > > From: Joaquín Koifman <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Problems with Gnubg 04-Mar-2009 release > To: "Christian Anthon" <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected], > "Massimiliano Maini" <[email protected]>, [email protected] > Date: Friday, 13 March, 2009, 2:24 PM > > Hi all, > > A couple of comments about some issues: > > 1) It's still not solved in the 20080313 version. > > 8) I think that what happened was that the match was already analyzed. 45 > seconds is normal for an analysis while 5 seconds is very, very fast.. Could > you try to reproduce it again, Efe? > > A) I couldn't reproduce neither in the 20080313 version nor in the 20080304 > one. > > C) Probably gnubg had already won the match or there was no posibility that > it could save the gammon, in the examples you gave. Thus, the program made > any move because the equities would be all the same. Could you check this > also? > > Joaquin > > > >
_______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
