Thanks, guys! I am now planning to conduct a similar review of my 124 matches from 2008. Expected completion: some time this weekend.
Alan: I didn't care about the order of the dice for these purposes. (I.e., I considered 52 and 25 to be a match.)
Another oddity noticed during review, but not yet reported: the "misses" show a strong tendency to be "near-misses". For example, if an opening roll of 42 is not exactly matched by responder's roll, the responder's roll will show excessively high occurrences of 52, 43, 41, or 32. That is to say: even when you do manage to miss, you're too often "off by 1".
The most extreme outlier was a match with Hrqls (Backgammon (Hrqls vs. wetware) ), in which 9 games out of 14 were exact matches, and the remaining 5 non-matches were all of the "off by 1" variety. Note: I'm inclined to consider 1 to be "next" to 6. I think it's reasonable, especially if some "remainder" function is at play in the dice generation routine(s), as is often the case.
(peida) Kui Sa tahad, et teised kasutajad ei teaks, millega Sa tegeled, siis võid lehel Seaded valida varjatud režiimi (ainult tasulised liikmed). (pauloaguia) (näita kõiki vihjeid)