Re: [Bug-gnubg] What MET is loaded by default with standard installation?

[Robert-Jan Veldhuizen]

I use the SW 2.1 MET, I think it's probably the best or second-best MET 
GNUBG provides. The Jacobs MET is the other one.

The Zadeh MET doesn't seem very realistic to me, with f.i. 28.75% MWC at 
-2,-1Cr where simulations with GNUBG get a MWC percentage of well over 30; 
probably also over 31. The SW 2.1 MET gives 31.5% MWC for this particular 
score; Jacobs gives 31.0%.

Kit Woolsey's MET really lacks at least a third digit to the entries. This 
can sometimes produce pretty inaccurate results.

For scores where both players are more than 15-away or even 25-away, this 
only matters when someone plays a 15/25+pt match, and at these scores the 
MET used probably won't make much difference anyway (they'll likely be very 
close to each other all). The interpolation GNUBG uses in these cases is 
probably sufficient for almost anything.

It might be interesting to hear Neil Kazaross' opinion on this, as he's a 
very good and experienced match player.


--
Robert-Jan (Zorba on FIBS)