| |
BGonline.org Forums
Does XG's definition of PR annoy you?
Posted By: ah_clem In Response To: Does XG's definition of PR annoy you? (Timothy Chow)
Date: Tuesday, 9 July 2024, at 12:41 a.m.
I don't use gnubg much any more now that I have XG, so I don't have much to say about it, but if there's a consensus to replace the names for the various levels I won't complain.
As Tim points out in his reply, calculating a single number to represent the skill level is not a trivial exercise. If you think about it as a function from a finite sequence of very complicated situations to the Real Numbers between 0 and 100 you are always going to lose information and complexity. (This is true of just about any attempt to associate a single real number on things in the real world - R is just a poor mathematical model for most things, but since it's the mathematical system that almost everyone is familiar with it tends to be used this way.)
That said, I'm mostly OK with XG PR, although often I think of it as more of a measure of how difficult the decisions were vs my actual skill i.e. if I get a PR below 5 it probably means that the decisions were easy rather than that I'm actually "World Class"
One thing I'd like to see, although I don't have a concrete proposal for it, is to evaluate the cube decisions in match play as MWC instead of EMG. I understand why checker play errors should be evaluated as EMG, but cube decisions would seem to be better expressed as MWC. Maybe a separate PR for checker play (EMG) vs Cube decisions (MWC) instead of just one number?
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.