I was talking with Art Benjamin about his recent work on racing
formulas, and he pointed me to the following cool page by Hal Heinrich
which lets you test your ability to estimate EPC.

https://boinqserver20220506131748.azurewebsites.net/positionquiz

Art says that he's usually able to get the EPC correct to within
half a pip, using techniques that he's written about in his USBGF
PrimeTime column.

---
Tim Chow

Timothy Chow <tchow12000@yahoo.com> writes:

> https://boinqserver20220506131748.azurewebsites.net/positionquiz

Thanks.

> Art says that he's usually able to get the EPC correct to within half
> a pip

I am not that good with my EPC approximation (about 1 pip off, as
written in my article), but I expected this.

> using techniques that he's written about in his USBGF PrimeTime column

Could you please provide a link?

Best regards

Axel

On 11/23/2022 5:00 PM, Axel Reichert wrote:
>> using techniques that he's written about in his USBGF PrimeTime column
>
> Could you please provide a link?

The link is https://usbgf.org/primetime-magazine/ but that won't do you
much good unless you pay to join the USBGF.

---
Tim Chow

Timothy Chow <tchow12000@yahoo.com> writes:

> The link is https://usbgf.org/primetime-magazine/ but that won't do
> you much good unless you pay to join the USBGF.

Which does not make that much sense for a local player from Germany. I
was already suspecting this. Thanks anyway.

Best regards

Axel

On 11/22/2022 8:23 PM, Timothy Chow wrote:
> I was talking with Art Benjamin about his recent work on racing
> formulas, and he pointed me to the following cool page by Hal Heinrich
> which lets you test your ability to estimate EPC.
>
> https://boinqserver20220506131748.azurewebsites.net/positionquiz
>
> Art says that he's usually able to get the EPC correct to within
> half a pip, using techniques that he's written about in his USBGF
> PrimeTime column.

Assuming I could get to the point where I could calculate EPC with that
level of accuracy, would that provide better cube decisions than simply
using ISight or something similar?

--
Ah....Clem
The future is fun, the future is fair.

On 11/25/2022 10:41 AM, ah....Clem wrote:
> On 11/22/2022 8:23 PM, Timothy Chow wrote:
>> I was talking with Art Benjamin about his recent work on racing
>> formulas, and he pointed me to the following cool page by Hal Heinrich
>> which lets you test your ability to estimate EPC.
>>
>> https://boinqserver20220506131748.azurewebsites.net/positionquiz
>>
>> Art says that he's usually able to get the EPC correct to within
>> half a pip, using techniques that he's written about in his USBGF
>> PrimeTime column.
>
> Assuming I could get to the point where I could calculate EPC with that
> level of accuracy, would that provide better cube decisions than simply
> using ISight or something similar?

Art's claim is a qualified yes. He's given talks about this but hasn't
published anything yet. In addition to EPC, his main new idea is that
one should try to estimate the *variance* in the number of rolls needed
to bear off, and not just the *expected value* (i.e., EPC). You don't
need to estimate the variance precisely; you just need to be able to
assess a position as being in one of four categories (I forget what he
calls the categories, but you can think of them as low, medium low,
medium high, and high). If you can do this, and memorize a few
additional numbers, then he claims you can achieve significantly higher
accuracy than Keith or ISight.

Whether it's worth all that effort to master his method is of course
another question.

---
Tim Chow

"ah....Clem" <ah_clem@ymail.com> writes:

[EPC estimates 0.5 pips off]

> Assuming I could get to the point where I could calculate EPC with
> that level of accuracy, would that provide better cube decisions than
> simply using ISight or something similar?

I would guess so. Section 6.1 in my article has quite some information
on this topic. Especially table 6 is relevant.

Best regards

Axel

Timothy Chow <tchow12000@yahoo.com> writes:

> In addition to EPC, his main new idea is that one should try to
> estimate the *variance* in the number of rolls needed to bear off, and
> not just the *expected value* (i.e., EPC).

Yes. I discussed this with Bob Koca (IIRC) shortly after publishing my
Isight article. I played around with this idea a little bit, and it
seemed promising, but my gut feeling was that it needs much more effort
for perhaps only a slight gain. Hence I did not pursue this any further,
but it is still on my to-do list.

> he claims you can achieve significantly higher accuracy than Keith or
> ISight.

Well, Isight is already around 15 % better than Keith. With LESS
adjustments.

> Whether it's worth all that effort to master his method is of course
> another question.

Yup.

Best regards

Axel

On 11/25/2022 1:13 AM, Axel Reichert wrote:
> Timothy Chow <tchow12000@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> The link is https://usbgf.org/primetime-magazine/ but that won't do
>> you much good unless you pay to join the USBGF.
>
> Which does not make that much sense for a local player from Germany. I
> was already suspecting this. Thanks anyway.

Well, the main (only?) reason I joined was to obtain access to the
PrimeTime magazine premium content. For $85, you get electronic
access to all the back issues. (I'm assuming that your being in
Germany would not change this fact.)

---
Tim Chow