In my last post I looked at extending Janowski's cubeful equity model to match play.
The conclusion: match play also favors a cube life index very close to 0.70.
I played a Janowski match strategy with different cube life indexes against a Janowski match strategy with cube life index 0.70 as a benchmark. I ran 40k matches with variance reduction and recorded the average points per match.
The results:
If I fit parabolas through the results and force them to pass through zero ppm at x=0.7, I find optimal cube life indexes of x=0.61 for match length 3, x=0.64 for match length 5, x=0.68 for match length 7, and x=0.69 for match length 9.
All average points per match have a standard error of +/- 0.004ppm, so the statistics are marginal for the shorter match lengths.
There is some evidence for a smaller cube life index for shorter matches, but not much. In general the optimal match cube life index looks very close to the optimal money cube life index.
UPDATE: I ran longer simulations for more values of the cube life index for match lengths 3, 5, and 7 to try to get more accurate statistics. From those data I get optimal cube life indexes of 0.70, 0.67, and 0.69 for match lengths 3, 5, and 7 respectively. So no evidence of a smaller optimal cube life index for shorter matches: everything should use 0.70.
That said, the performance difference for short matches of using a suboptimal cube life index is pretty infinitesimal. It becomes a bigger deal for longer matches.
The conclusion: match play also favors a cube life index very close to 0.70.
I played a Janowski match strategy with different cube life indexes against a Janowski match strategy with cube life index 0.70 as a benchmark. I ran 40k matches with variance reduction and recorded the average points per match.
The results:
Match Length | x=0.5 | x=0.6 | x=0.8 | x=0.9 |
---|---|---|---|---|
3 | -0.004 | 0.000 | -0.004 | -0.007 |
5 | -0.007 | +0.007 | +0.002 | -0.024 |
7 | -0.021 | -0.003 | -0.008 | -0.029 |
9 | -0.028 | -0.006 | +0.003 | -0.037 |
If I fit parabolas through the results and force them to pass through zero ppm at x=0.7, I find optimal cube life indexes of x=0.61 for match length 3, x=0.64 for match length 5, x=0.68 for match length 7, and x=0.69 for match length 9.
All average points per match have a standard error of +/- 0.004ppm, so the statistics are marginal for the shorter match lengths.
There is some evidence for a smaller cube life index for shorter matches, but not much. In general the optimal match cube life index looks very close to the optimal money cube life index.
UPDATE: I ran longer simulations for more values of the cube life index for match lengths 3, 5, and 7 to try to get more accurate statistics. From those data I get optimal cube life indexes of 0.70, 0.67, and 0.69 for match lengths 3, 5, and 7 respectively. So no evidence of a smaller optimal cube life index for shorter matches: everything should use 0.70.
That said, the performance difference for short matches of using a suboptimal cube life index is pretty infinitesimal. It becomes a bigger deal for longer matches.
No comments:
Post a Comment