Re: [Bug-gnubg] optional (re)doubles

[Joern Thyssen]

On Sun, Aug 04, 2002 at 12:32:54AM +0200, Robert-Jan Veldhuizen wrote
> At 17:35 8/3/2002 -0400, Joern Thyssen wrote:
> 
> >Technically, it is a redouble, but since there is no market losers it
> >doesn't cost anything to wait.
> 
> Strictly speaking, it's an optional redouble (technically).
> 
> If ND==DT maybe GNUBG could have a seperate category, optional (re)double, 
> take? Now it's more or less arbitrary which GNUBNG chooses. Without 
> market-losers, there's no reason at all to double technically (but no 
> reason to wait either).
> 
> The same happens when ND==DP; I think GNUBG should say "optional 
> (re)double/too good to redouble, pass".
> 
> Right now, GNUBG sometimes says "too good to double" for a player who can't 
> even score a gammon, but loses nothing by waiting a turn to cash. Maybe it 
> should say "optional (re)double, pass" in those cases.

I've tried to implement "optional (re)double, {take,pass}" and "optional
double, beaver". It seems to work fine. 

The code should appears in Øystein's next build.

Jørn

-- 
Joern Thyssen, PhD
Vendsysselgade 3, 3., DK-9000 Aalborg, Denmark
+45 9813 2791 (private) / +45 2077 2689 (mobile) / +45 9633 7036 (work)