[MarkGritter]

[ QUOTE ]

I'll try to do some thinking on this. From what I understand, you generated a million hands and graphed the best setting for each hand. If you graphed the worst setting, would you find that they went from -4 to +3? How about if you graphed a random setting?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm... worst settings are generally pretty bad. For example, the best in the sample, TTTTQ 23457 KKK, has QT543 TTTKK Q72 as a legal setting, and this gets scooped by the worst hand in the set: A7652 T7652 TJQ. Random settings are pretty bad too--- the initial runs of my experiment, against a random setting, have scored in excess of +3 on average.

I think it would might interesting to plot the second-best setting for every hand on the same graph--- that would be feasible (though I'd probably want to work with a smaller subset, as recalculating all 1M hands takes a while.)

[ QUOTE ]

Also, the nature of CP2-7, with cards bad for the ends being good for the middle might have something to do with it. I wonder what a graph of straight CP would look like...

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been thinking of the high hand 223345789TQKA, which seems to be about the worst I can come up with. The settings 22334 A9875 KQT or 33457 2289T AKQ both have some strength in one of the hands and could avoid enough scoops to make it to -3.

I have been thinking of putting in knobs in my code to handle high-only and 1-6 scoring as well.