Single Comment

Excellent for the feedback, that is.

You have no idea how hungry I have been for so many years to find a
mathematician or statistician who would be in the mood to criticize my
numbers or my methods and point out the errors that must be there.

With all due respect, I give you this instant reply, but I do not examine
the specifics of what you said nor do I respond to them. I am in the midst
of other things and not in condition to reply.

I give you my double-barrelled platinum promise that the specific numeric
algorithmic probabilistic things you said will be closely and extensively
examined by me and that a serious reply will be forthcoming.

Meanwhile, literary criticism of your reply suggests that you agree with my
basic method but merely cavil at a few of my specific applications. Is this
right? If so, I celebrate. If not, I cerebrate.

If you haven't read my general 'theory of piece values', please please do
and if you can (though I hope you can't) tell me I'm full of it.

The general public here believes in my numbers more than I believe in my
numbers. Perhaps you can have the deciding vote, since paolo has declined
to speak up.

Did you know that a giant standing on a midget's shoulders can see further?
Well, in doing this math stuff about piece values let me tell you I've
always felt like a midget. But right now I can only write silly answers. I
just spent a few hours writing serious. The promises I made in previous
paragraphs are serious, though.