On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Stefan Kaitschick < [email protected]> wrote:
> I forgot to add, that I made an easily verifiable prediction. > If the pros don't make several attempts at 5 before grudgingly going to 4, > you can say "heh, Stefan, remember that prediction of yours?" > It's all in the packaging - how you present the match to them. For us the challenge is to be the first to beat a program at 4 stones but to them it should be prove that that they can still win at 4 stones and a challenge or taunt, i.e. "We think we can beat any pro given a 4 stone handicap, can you prove us wrong? 5 stones is not interesting to us (and shouldn't be to you either) because we have already proved that." Of course you cannot move down until you have established that a given handicap is no longer interesting. Don > > On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Stefan Kaitschick > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Ingo, > > > > ofcourse i wouldn't dream of accepting those conditions. > > I would be accepting 30 to 1 odds for H3 and 70 to 1 odds for H2. > > And the money I would be risking would make the unhappy outcomes a lot > > more likely. > > > > I would say this though: even if the bonus for winning was the same at > > all handicap levels, > > more pros would still chose 4 or 5 than 2 or 3. > > > > Stefan > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > [email protected] > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
