Wish I could drop, but I already own the cube!

Good point. This chess notation could create ambiguity. I was just
having a few seconds fun, trying to imagine a context where the !/? symbols
might cause confusion, but my attempts would be somewhat artificial.

For example, "Did you expect that Jovanka would play Re3?"
Does the above suggest that Re3 is a bad move?

It's a little bit artificial because, at higher levels, players don't
generally anticipate blunders. So you'd be more likely to see a sentence
like "Did you anticipate Jovanka's Re3!?" but that is actually an ambiguity.
Is the move a ! move or a !? move? I think the way to handle it is
"Did you anticipate Jovanka's Re3! ?" or maybe just leave out the question
mark altogether.

Paul

Peter

2020-07-01 17:33:09 UTC

Permalink

Post by Paul Epstein

Post by Tim Chow

Post by Peter

Post by Paul Epstein
6/5! isn't legal -- you're meant to move one space
after entering, not 114 spaces.

No, my dear little friend, that would be 6/5!.

Paul, in chess, is Re3! the same as Re6? and which move is better?

Good point. This chess notation could create ambiguity. I was just
having a few seconds fun, trying to imagine a context where the !/? symbols
might cause confusion, but my attempts would be somewhat artificial.
For example, "Did you expect that Jovanka would play Re3?"
Does the above suggest that Re3 is a bad move?
It's a little bit artificial because, at higher levels, players don't
generally anticipate blunders. So you'd be more likely to see a sentence
like "Did you anticipate Jovanka's Re3!?" but that is actually an ambiguity.
Is the move a ! move or a !? move? I think the way to handle it is
"Did you anticipate Jovanka's Re3! ?" or maybe just leave out the question
mark altogether.
Paul

What do you think of Minkowski's function?

Paul Epstein

2020-07-01 20:50:07 UTC

Permalink

Post by Peter

Post by Paul Epstein

Post by Tim Chow

Post by Peter

Post by Paul Epstein
6/5! isn't legal -- you're meant to move one space
after entering, not 114 spaces.

No, my dear little friend, that would be 6/5!.

Paul, in chess, is Re3! the same as Re6? and which move is better?

Good point. This chess notation could create ambiguity. I was just
having a few seconds fun, trying to imagine a context where the !/? symbols
might cause confusion, but my attempts would be somewhat artificial.
For example, "Did you expect that Jovanka would play Re3?"
Does the above suggest that Re3 is a bad move?
It's a little bit artificial because, at higher levels, players don't
generally anticipate blunders. So you'd be more likely to see a sentence
like "Did you anticipate Jovanka's Re3!?" but that is actually an ambiguity.
Is the move a ! move or a !? move? I think the way to handle it is
"Did you anticipate Jovanka's Re3! ?" or maybe just leave out the question
mark altogether.
Paul

What do you think of Minkowski's function?

It works well if you've recently had a filling meal including something
like a tuna mayo baguette, but it's less effective for you if you're
hungry while you're thinking about it.

Paul

Tim Chow

2020-07-02 02:29:14 UTC

Permalink

Post by Paul Epstein

Post by Tim Chow
Paul, in chess, is Re3! the same as Re6? and which move is better?

[...]

Post by Paul Epstein
It's a little bit artificial because, at higher levels, players don't
generally anticipate blunders. So you'd be more likely to see a sentence
like "Did you anticipate Jovanka's Re3!?" but that is actually an ambiguity.
Is the move a ! move or a !? move? I think the way to handle it is
"Did you anticipate Jovanka's Re3! ?" or maybe just leave out the question
mark altogether.

Peter's point, I believe, is that there's a distinction between a punctuation
mark that is functioning as a punctuation mark, and a punctuation mark that
is serving some other function. So "Did you anticipate Jovanka's Re3!?" is
technically not an ambiguity, because if the intent is to indicate a !? move
then there is a missing punctuation mark at the end.

That's why in my case I continued with "and which move is better?" because
many style guides will say that if you have a multi-part question, you can
continue with a lowercase letter after the question mark, e.g., "Are you
going to buy a Christmas present for Jane? and her son? and their dog?"

---
Tim Chow

Paul Epstein

2020-07-02 11:53:43 UTC

Permalink

Post by Tim Chow

Post by Paul Epstein

Post by Tim Chow
Paul, in chess, is Re3! the same as Re6? and which move is better?

[...]

Peter's point, I believe, is that there's a distinction between a punctuation
mark that is functioning as a punctuation mark, and a punctuation mark that
is serving some other function. So "Did you anticipate Jovanka's Re3!?" is
technically not an ambiguity, because if the intent is to indicate a !? move
then there is a missing punctuation mark at the end.
That's why in my case I continued with "and which move is better?" because
many style guides will say that if you have a multi-part question, you can
continue with a lowercase letter after the question mark, e.g., "Are you
going to buy a Christmas present for Jane? and her son? and their dog?"

I'm surprised at what you say about style guides. Your sentence looks
very odd to me. I would delete all question marks except the final one.
Then, if people behaved according to logical axioms, you'd have a problem
because a "no" answer would be a not to Jane && Son && Dog, and if you
wanted to know the answer to the Jane subquestion, you'd be stuck.
However, people would understand that you were interested in the
subquestions, so only the final question mark is necessary.

Never heard of your way of writing. For some context about my experience,
I'm in my fifties, so I don't know what 18 year olds are being taught
now or 20 years ago. I'm English, but am very familiar with US periodicals
and read The Nation, Harper's and the New Yorker very regularly.
If they wrote sentences like that, I would have noticed.

Paul

Tim Chow

2020-07-02 16:02:49 UTC

Permalink

Post by Paul Epstein
I'm surprised at what you say about style guides.

[...]

Post by Paul Epstein
I'm in my fifties, so I don't know what 18 year olds are being taught
now or 20 years ago. I'm English, but am very familiar with US periodicals
and read The Nation, Harper's and the New Yorker very regularly.
If they wrote sentences like that, I would have noticed.

It's more common in older literature (18th and 19th centuries). Here are
some links to more information.

https://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/qMarks.asp

https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/36821/using-a-question-mark-mid-sentence

---
Tim Chow

Paul Epstein

2020-06-30 18:14:34 UTC

Permalink

I don't want to play boldly against such a strong board.
9/8 with 50% confidence.

Paul

BlueDice

2020-07-08 16:01:35 UTC

Permalink

I would slot the 5 and hope for an anchor or a miracle.
I've no idea if that is better or worse than 9/8.
Looking forward to Tim's usual substantial answer on this one.
--
BD

Tim Chow

2020-07-11 03:13:37 UTC

Permalink

XGID=-aa---E-CB--bD---b-c-bb-bA:1:1:1:21:0:0:0:0:10

X:Player 1 O:Player 2
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X O | | O O O O |
| X O | | O O O O |
| X | | O |
| X | | |
| | X | |
| |BAR| |
| | | X |
| | | X |
| X | | X | +---+
| O X X | | X | | 2 |
| O X X | | X O O | +---+
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 149 O: 123 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, X own cube
X to play 21

The motivation for 9/8 is presumably to reduce shots. But after 9/8,
O will hit with almost every roll anyway (the only exceptions being
21 32 55). So X might as well try to improve his structure by unstacking,
rather than breaking a point and piling up on the 8pt.

1. Rollout¹ Bar/23 6/5 eq:-0.651
Player: 31.23% (G:6.48% B:0.33%)
Opponent: 68.77% (G:46.99% B:0.45%)
Confidence: ±0.008 (-0.660..-0.643) - [100.0%]

2. Rollout¹ Bar/23 8/7 eq:-0.734 (-0.083)
Player: 28.28% (G:5.78% B:0.29%)
Opponent: 71.72% (G:47.16% B:0.55%)
Confidence: ±0.008 (-0.742..-0.725) - [0.0%]

3. Rollout¹ Bar/23 9/8 eq:-0.760 (-0.108)
Player: 26.99% (G:5.42% B:0.30%)
Opponent: 73.01% (G:46.38% B:0.54%)
Confidence: ±0.008 (-0.768..-0.751) - [0.0%]

¹ 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.207.pre-release

---
Tim Chow

Paul Epstein

2020-07-11 07:52:06 UTC

Permalink

9/8, wrong though it is, is a safer play broadly speaking.
You said in another thread that the number of blots needs to be considered
when assessing safety.
Also, when assessing safety, we need to consider the probability of O's
next two rolls both hitting. This is surely less likely with my
play which submits the additional blot to two indirect numbers rather
than two direct numbers.

I would summarise the reason for the solution as "A bold play is needed."
rather than "9/8 is equally bold" (which seems a wrong thing to say).

I anticipate an objection along the grounds of "9/8 makes it difficult
to tidy the position so that's the reason 9/8 isn't really safer."
But if we stretch the definitions of "safe" and "bold" this far, then the wrong play is
almost never "safe" and the safe/bold concept loses value.
One strength of the safe/bold concept is that (in contrast to the usually
highly taxing task of identifying the DMP play), identifying which plays
are bold and which are safe is usually straightforward.

Paul

Paul Epstein

2020-07-11 08:11:25 UTC

Permalink

Post by Tim Chow
XGID=-aa---E-CB--bD---b-c-bb-bA:1:1:1:21:0:0:0:0:10
X:Player 1 O:Player 2
Score is X:0 O:0. Unlimited Game
+13-14-15-16-17-18------19-20-21-22-23-24-+
| X O | | O O O O |
| X O | | O O O O |
| X | | O |
| X | | |
| | X | |
| |BAR| |
| | | X |
| | | X |
| X | | X | +---+
| O X X | | X | | 2 |
| O X X | | X O O | +---+
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 149 O: 123 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, X own cube
X to play 21
The motivation for 9/8 is presumably to reduce shots. But after 9/8,
O will hit with almost every roll anyway (the only exceptions being
21 32 55). So X might as well try to improve his structure by unstacking,
rather than breaking a point and piling up on the 8pt.
1. Rollout¹ Bar/23 6/5 eq:-0.651
Player: 31.23% (G:6.48% B:0.33%)
Opponent: 68.77% (G:46.99% B:0.45%)
Confidence: ±0.008 (-0.660..-0.643) - [100.0%]
2. Rollout¹ Bar/23 8/7 eq:-0.734 (-0.083)
Player: 28.28% (G:5.78% B:0.29%)
Opponent: 71.72% (G:47.16% B:0.55%)
Confidence: ±0.008 (-0.742..-0.725) - [0.0%]
3. Rollout¹ Bar/23 9/8 eq:-0.760 (-0.108)
Player: 26.99% (G:5.42% B:0.30%)
Opponent: 73.01% (G:46.38% B:0.54%)
Confidence: ±0.008 (-0.768..-0.751) - [0.0%]
¹ 1296 Games rolled with Variance Reduction.
Dice Seed: 271828
Moves: 3-ply, cube decisions: XG Roller
eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.19.207.pre-release

Note that although the option of settling the game for 1
would indeed be of great benefit to the roller, the psychological
state of despondency suggested by the words "Wish I could" is unmerited.
With the correct play, our chances of winning are almost a third which
ain't so bad.

Paul