Re: [Bug-gnubg] Wrong cube errors categories in analysis statistics panel

[Holger]

At 23:32 03.10.2003, Joern Thyssen wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 11:06:11PM +0200, Holger wrote
> > all those figures by now. (I guess I'd need someone to explain me the
> > origins of MWC, GWC, equity and the match points. Or does somebody have a
> > reference on this?)
>
> A short course:

Thank you, Jørn.

> GWC = game winning chance. The chance of winning the current game. gnubg
> stores the cubeless gwc it in arOutput[ OUTPUT_WIN ]. The remaining
> values in arOutput are the cubeless gammon/backgammon percentages.

This I knew. So GWC does not include any _value_ for gammons or backgammons.

> MWC = match winning chance. The chance of winning the match. The
> cubeless MWC is usually calculated from the the cubeless gwc, gammon,
> and backgammon percentages using a match equity table. The cubeless MWC
> is not stored anywhere in gnubg, but must be calculated from arOutput
> when needed. The cubeful MWC is stored in arOutput[ OUTPUT_CBEFUL ].
>
> equity = the expected number of points for this game. At least two kinds
> of equities exists: money equity and normalised equity (for match play).
> The money equity is just
> 2*arOutput[WIN]+arOutput[WIN_G]-arOutput[LOSE_G] (ignoring gammons). THe
> normalised equity is calculated from the cubeless MWC using linear
> interpolation. gnubg stores the equity (cubeless money equity/cubeless
> normalised equity) in arOutput[ OUTPUT_EQUITY ].  The cubeful money
> equity is stored in arOutput[ OUTPUT_CUBEFUL ] for money game.
>
> You can calculate the take point in any of these quanties. gnubg just
> happens to do it in cubeless GWCs.

Ok, but there is still one thing I don't understand. If the calculation of 
the match points accounts for gammon (and backgammon) values then how can 
it be compared with GWC, that doesn't? I'm not saying that you're not 
correct. I just don't get this particular point.
If I'm not mistaken I can be too good if I have high gammon chances, but 
just have a double when I have the same winning probability and less gammon 
chances. And as above, the GWC doesn't reflect this, does it? (If it does, 
then how?)

Regards,

        Holger