XGID=----a-E-D-AAbD---d-c-bc---:1:1:1:53:0:0:0:0:10

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 |
| X O | | O O O |
| X O | | O O |
| X O | | |
| | | |
| |BAR| |
| | | X |
| X | | X |
| X | | X | +---+
| O X | | X | | 2 |
| O X X X | | X O | +---+
+12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
Pip count X: 135 O: 114 X-O: 0-0
Cube: 2, X own cube
X to play 53

---
Tim Chow

On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 9:57:59 AM UTC-4, Tim Chow wrote:
> XGID=----a-E-D-AAbD---d-c-bc---:1:1:1:53:0:0:0:0:10
>
> 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 |
> | X O | | O O O |
> | X O | | O O |
> | X O | | |
> | | | |
> | |BAR| |
> | | | X |
> | X | | X |
> | X | | X | +---+
> | O X | | X | | 2 |
> | O X X X | | X O | +---+
> +12-11-10--9--8--7-------6--5--4--3--2--1-+
> Pip count X: 135 O: 114 X-O: 0-0
> Cube: 2, X own cube
> X to play 53
>
> ---
> Tim Chow

This is a great example of where the title gives away the answer. I haven't looked at the problem but I'd have no problem betting good money the 10pt is correct otherwise it wouldn't have been saved/posted/brought up. It's not like a 'bar point or the 5pt' problem. It's much more random and to come out of the blue like that ... well, I'm making the 10pt blind.

It's like when you play multiple choice trivia and one answer is 'too long' so they have to shrink the font or go two lines to fit it in. They wouldn't have done it unless that was the right answer. Or, another trivia example, when the multiple choice answers are all common, well known names and there's one guy you've never heard of ...it's that guy otherwise why would they have included him? (unless it's a situation where there are no other *guys* as potential answers and they need to fill in the spot)

Stick

On 3/28/2022 5:05 PM, Stick Rice wrote:

> This is a great example of where the title gives away the answer.

If you like, I can re-institute the hash functions to prove that
you're talking nonsense.

---
Tim Chow

On Tuesday, March 29, 2022 at 8:59:38 AM UTC-4, Tim Chow wrote:
> On 3/28/2022 5:05 PM, Stick Rice wrote:
>
> > This is a great example of where the title gives away the answer.
> If you like, I can re-institute the hash functions to prove that
> you're talking nonsense.
>
> ---
> Tim Chow

With such a violent answer I must be right. And again, the experiment can't be done when the person posting knows that I'm on the other end guessing based on their title. Don't be silly.

Stick

On Saturday, April 2, 2022 at 9:21:31 AM UTC-4, Tim Chow wrote:
> On 3/29/2022 9:26 PM, Stick Rice wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 29, 2022 at 8:59:38 AM UTC-4, Tim Chow wrote:
> >> On 3/28/2022 5:05 PM, Stick Rice wrote:
> >>
> >>> This is a great example of where the title gives away the answer.
> >> If you like, I can re-institute the hash functions to prove that
> >> you're talking nonsense.
> >>
> >> ---
> >> Tim Chow
> >
> > With such a violent answer I must be right. And again, the experiment can't be done when the person posting knows that I'm on the other end guessing based on their title. Don't be silly.
> As usual, going down in flames when your bluff is called. I know that
> you're guessing every one of my problems based on the title, whether or
> not I have a hash value attached, so it would not change the
> experimental conditions in the slightest.
>
> You remind me of Murat, actually. He's convinced that he can predict
> GNUBG's dice. The same psychological effect is happening here, where
> you manage to convince yourself that your random guesses demonstrate
> your genius. And when a formal test is proposed, you duck out, because
> you know you're talking nonsense.
>
> ---
> Tim Chow

There is no way to keep you from altering titles/creating titles based on the fact that you know I'd be doing it. You had no idea I'd been doing it for years. Now you do. If you can't see the difference there's nothing I can do for you.

Stick

On Saturday, April 2, 2022 at 1:42:32 PM UTC-4, Tim Chow wrote:
> On 3/28/2022 5:05 PM, Stick Rice wrote:
> > This is a great example of where the title gives away the answer. I haven't looked at the problem but I'd have no problem betting good money the 10pt is correct otherwise it wouldn't have been saved/posted/brought up. It's not like a 'bar point or the 5pt' problem. It's much more random and to come out of the blue like that ... well, I'm making the 10pt blind.
> Just now I checked Google Groups and found a few possible parallels.
>
> There was one problem where I said, "5pt, 10pt, or hit?" The answer
> was to hit.
>
> There were three problems of the form "5pt or 9pt?" In two cases the
> answer was to make the 9pt and in one case the answer was to make the
> 10pt.
>
> I bring this up not because Stick will admit that he's wrong, since
> he never admits that he's wrong. I bring it up for the entertainment
> value of seeing Stick come up with a feeble rebuttal. Stick may not be
> the #1 Giant but he gets my vote for #1 when it comes to making up
> excuses for the nonsense he spouts.
>
> ---
> Tim Chow

The 9pt or 5pt is a hell of a lot more common than the 5pt or 10pt. How can you not understand that? And with the 5pt/10pt/hit there is a third option and all I'd have been sure of there is making the 5pt is wrong.

Stick

On 4/4/2022 5:45 AM, Stick Rice wrote:

> There is no way to keep you from altering titles/creating titles based on the fact that you know I'd be doing it. You had no idea I'd been doing it for years. Now you do. If you can't see the difference there's nothing I can do for you.

*Now* I do? You've been making this empty boast for years.
You think I haven't noticed? Why did I post those 30+ hash
function problems then?

If I had any doubts about my #1 vote, they are dispelled now.

---
Tim Chow

On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 8:37:14 AM UTC-4, Tim Chow wrote:
> On 4/4/2022 5:45 AM, Stick Rice wrote:
>
> > There is no way to keep you from altering titles/creating titles based on the fact that you know I'd be doing it. You had no idea I'd been doing it for years. Now you do. If you can't see the difference there's nothing I can do for you.
> *Now* I do? You've been making this empty boast for years.
> You think I haven't noticed? Why did I post those 30+ hash
> function problems then?
>
> If I had any doubts about my #1 vote, they are dispelled now.
>
> ---
> Tim Chow

I have no idea what those "30+ has function problems" even were. I don't read it when I realize it is garbage any more, esp. if it's long.

Stick