<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Simulation, CHONE, and the Cardinals</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gashousegraphs.com/2009/11/18/simulation-chone-and-the-cardinals/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gashousegraphs.com/2009/11/18/simulation-chone-and-the-cardinals/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 03:52:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pete DuBois</title>
		<link>http://gashousegraphs.com/2009/11/18/simulation-chone-and-the-cardinals/#comment-115</link>
		<dc:creator>Pete DuBois</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2010 21:16:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://playahardnine.wordpress.com/?p=332#comment-115</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is great stuff!  Projections like this (which give a range of likely performance) would be much more useful than the single-point projections we get now.

There are lots of variables, and in a perfect world I&#039;d think different types of players would have more different standard deviation values possible.  Now that this work is out there, though, I&#039;m sure there will be those trying to expand on it (as I&#039;m sure you will); I would also think that those that do the actual projections should be able to at least some of the basic work.  However, it won&#039;t be me - that stuff is beyond my expertise/experience/patience level.

Like I said, great stuff.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is great stuff!  Projections like this (which give a range of likely performance) would be much more useful than the single-point projections we get now.</p>
<p>There are lots of variables, and in a perfect world I&#8217;d think different types of players would have more different standard deviation values possible.  Now that this work is out there, though, I&#8217;m sure there will be those trying to expand on it (as I&#8217;m sure you will); I would also think that those that do the actual projections should be able to at least some of the basic work.  However, it won&#8217;t be me &#8211; that stuff is beyond my expertise/experience/patience level.</p>
<p>Like I said, great stuff.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Simulating the Cards Plan B&#8217;s &#171; Play a Hard Nine</title>
		<link>http://gashousegraphs.com/2009/11/18/simulation-chone-and-the-cardinals/#comment-114</link>
		<dc:creator>Simulating the Cards Plan B&#8217;s &#171; Play a Hard Nine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 04:22:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://playahardnine.wordpress.com/?p=332#comment-114</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] been a lot of talk about the plan B options, so I thought it would be a good time to bring out my WAR simulation (which I&#8217;ve expanded to include [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] been a lot of talk about the plan B options, so I thought it would be a good time to bring out my WAR simulation (which I&#8217;ve expanded to include [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
