On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 05:39:53PM +0200, Eugene van der Pijll wrote: > En op 02 mei 2002 sprak Ala Qumsieh: > > > > Just a stupid question: > > > > Since the best score for Cantor is 34.13, and that for Kolakoski is 52.13, > > shouldn't BoB be at 86.26 instead of the pathetic 88.28? > > BoB could be. But as the best scores per hole are known, that does not > add any new information, so BoB decided that he would post his best > solution that he wrote himself.
I disagree. Since BoB's score could be lower than the best player score (or the sum of the best scores) by combining features from various solutions, having BoB's score be *higher* than the best score doesn't tell you anything. If BoB's score is lower than the best score (or sum of the best scores), it means that there is a better solution than any of the players have yet found. If BoB's score is the same as the best score, it means that, despite being able to see *all* the solutions, the judges haven't been able to find a shorter solution than the players. Basically, what's the point in calling it Best of Breed if it isn't? Ronald
